Fujitsu Ltd. v. Competitive Technologies, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that the “defendant has not engaged in off-label marketing, and has therefore not violated the FCA”
• noting that “[f]amiliarity with Judge Korman’s decision dismissing the Fourth Amended Complaint is assumed, and [the court would] not repeat his thorough discussion of the background of plaintiffs claim,” but never referring to the separate unpublished two-page order on the retaliation claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).