Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-02965/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-02965-83/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SYNOPSYS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ATOPTECH, INC.,

Defendant.

 /

No. C-13-2965 MMC

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS

FIRST SUPPLEMENTAL AMENDED

COMPLAINT; VACATING HEARING

Before the Court is defendant ATopTech, Inc.’s (“ATopTech”) “Motion to Dismiss

First Supplemental Amended Complaint,” filed January 29, 2016. Plaintiff Synopsys, Inc.

(“Synopsys”) has filed opposition, to which ATopTech has replied. Having read and

considered the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the motion, the Court deems

the matter suitable for decision on the parties’ respective written submissions, VACATES

the hearing scheduled for February 5, 2016, and rules as follows:

Based on Synopsys’s applications for supplementary registration, the Court finds

Synopsys has effectively accomplished supplementary registration of the previously

unregistered material identified therein, and, consequently, is entitled to go forward on each

Case 3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document 596 Filed 02/04/16 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

of its remaining claims. The Court further finds the effective date of each such

supplementary registration is the respective date of the corresponding basic registration.

Accordingly, the motion to dismiss is hereby DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 4, 2016 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:13-cv-02965-MMC Document 596 Filed 02/04/16 Page 2 of 2