Strikepoint Trading, LLC v. Sabolyk

Ninth Circuit

Strikepoint Trading, LLC v. Sabolyk

636 F.3d 524, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468, 2011 WL 597029

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 22, 2011

Docket09-56510

StatusPublished

This text of 636 F.3d 524 (Strikepoint Trading, LLC v. Sabolyk) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Strikepoint Trading, LLC v. Sabolyk, 636 F.3d 524, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468, 2011 WL 597029 (9th Cir. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This appeal is DISMISSED as moot.

During oral argument, counsel for Strikepoint Trading, LLC (“StrikePoint”), represented that (1) neither Global Asset Advisors (“GAA”) nor Sabolyk had violated the permanent injunction entered by the district court in this case (which ended in August 2010); (2) Strikepoint would not seek any damages from either Appellant regarding the permanent injunction or the trade secrets claims in the case; and (3) Strikepoint would not seek attorney fees from GAA in this case and, if seeking attorney fees at all, would only seek them from Sabolyk as they relate to the jury verdict of $102,300 for breach of contract.

With such representations by counsel for Strikepoint, counsel for the Appellants agreed the case was moot. A certified copy of this order shall serve as the mandate of this court.

DISMISSED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

This appeal is DISMISSED as moot.

During oral argument, counsel for Strikepoint Trading, LLC (“StrikePoint”), represented that (1) neither Global Asset Advisors (“GAA”) nor Sabolyk had violated the permanent injunction entered by the district court in this case (which ended in August 2010); (2) Strikepoint would not seek any damages from either Appellant regarding the permanent injunction or the trade secrets claims in the case; and (3) Strikepoint would not seek attorney fees from GAA in this case and, if seeking attorney fees at all, would only seek them from Sabolyk as they relate to the jury verdict of $102,300 for breach of contract.

With such representations by counsel for Strikepoint, counsel for the Appellants agreed the case was moot. A certified copy of this order shall serve as the mandate of this court.

DISMISSED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

636 F.3d 524, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 3468, 2011 WL 597029, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strikepoint-trading-llc-v-sabolyk-ca9-2011.