Walker v. Analog Devices, Inc.

D. Massachusetts

Walker v. Analog Devices, Inc.

DecidedAugust 18, 2023

Docket1:22-cv-11934

StatusUnknown

This text of Walker v. Analog Devices, Inc. (Walker v. Analog Devices, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Walker v. Analog Devices, Inc., (D. Mass. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

) CHAD I. WALKER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 22-11934-PBS ) ANALOG DEVICES, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) a)

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS [Docket No. 6] August 4, 2023

Boal, M.J. Pro se plaintiff Chad I. Walker filed this action against defendant Analog Devices, Inc. asserting violations of the Sherman Act. Docket No. 1-1. Walker alleges that the confidentiality agreement he entered into with Analog Devices violates antitrust laws. Analog Devices has moved to dismiss Walker’s complaint. Docket No. 6. For the following reasons, this Court recommends that Judge Saris grant Analog Devices’ motion.! I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND? In 2017, Walker signed an employment agreement with Analog Devices. Docket No. 1-1

' On December 8, 2022, Judge Saris referred this case to the undersigned for full pretrial management, and report and recommendation on dispositive motions. Docket No. 13. ? Because this case is presently before this Court on a motion to dismiss, I set forth the facts taking as true all well-pleaded allegations in the complaint and drawing all reasonable inferences in Walker’s favor. See Morales-Tajion v. P.R. Elec. Power Auth., 524 F.3d 15, 17 (Ist Cir. 2008). PIE LF j ws fo oy» >}?

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

) CHAD I. WALKER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 22-11934-PBS ) ANALOG DEVICES, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) a)

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS [Docket No. 6] August 4, 2023

Boal, M.J. Pro se plaintiff Chad I. Walker filed this action against defendant Analog Devices, Inc. asserting violations of the Sherman Act. Docket No. 1-1. Walker alleges that the confidentiality agreement he entered into with Analog Devices violates antitrust laws. Analog Devices has moved to dismiss Walker’s complaint. Docket No. 6. For the following reasons, this Court recommends that Judge Saris grant Analog Devices’ motion.! I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND? In 2017, Walker signed an employment agreement with Analog Devices. Docket No. 1-1

' On December 8, 2022, Judge Saris referred this case to the undersigned for full pretrial management, and report and recommendation on dispositive motions. Docket No. 13. ? Because this case is presently before this Court on a motion to dismiss, I set forth the facts taking as true all well-pleaded allegations in the complaint and drawing all reasonable inferences in Walker’s favor. See Morales-Tajion v. P.R. Elec. Power Auth., 524 F.3d 15, 17 (Ist Cir. 2008). PIE LF j ws fo oy» >}?

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Walker v. Analog Devices, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-analog-devices-inc-mad-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack