Arunachalam v. Apple, Inc., 021320 FEDFED, 2019-1251
|Opinion Judge:||PER CURIAM.|
|Party Name:||LAKSHMI ARUNACHALAM, Plaintiff-Appellant v. APPLE, INC., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICSAMERICA, INC., FACEBOOK, INC., ALPHABETINC., MICROSOFT CORPORATION, INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINESCORPORATION, SAP AMERICA, INC., JPMORGANCHASE & CO., FISERV, INC., WELLS FARGOBANK, N.A., CITIGROUP, INC., CITIBANK, N.A., FULTON FINANCIAL CORPORATION, ECLIPSEFOUNDATION,...|
|Attorney:||Lakshmi Arunachalam, Menlo Park, CA, pro se. Brian E. Ferguson, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee Apple, Inc. Also represented by Robert T. Vlasis, III. Philip A. Irwin, Covington & Burling LLP, New York, NY, for defendant-appellee Samsung Electronics America, Inc...|
|Judge Panel:||Before Lourie, Moore, and Chen, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||February 13, 2020|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit|
This disposition is nonprecedential.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 5:18-cv-01250-EJD, Judge Edward J. Davila.
Lakshmi Arunachalam, Menlo Park, CA, pro se.
Brian E. Ferguson, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee Apple, Inc. Also represented by Robert T. Vlasis, III.
Philip A. Irwin, Covington & Burling LLP, New York, NY, for defendant-appellee Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
Heidi Lyn Keefe, Cooley LLP, Palo Alto, CA, for defendant-appellee Facebook, Inc.
Ryan R. Smith, Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati, PC, Palo Alto, CA, for defendant-appellee Alphabet Inc.
Kristin L. Cleveland, Klarquist Sparkman, LLP, Portland, OR, for defendant-appellee Microsoft Corporation.
Kevin J. Culligan, Maynard, Cooper & Gale, PC, New York, NY, for defendant-appellee International Business Machines Corporation. Also represented by Mark J. Abate, Goodwin Procter LLP, New York, NY.
Tharan Gregory Lanier, Jones Day, Palo Alto, CA, for defendant-appellee SAP America, Inc. Also represented by Joseph Beauchamp, Houston, TX.
Douglas R. Nemec, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York, NY, for defendant-appellee JPMor-gan Chase & Co. Also represented by Edward Tulin; James Y. Pak, Palo Alto, CA.
Ramsey M. Al-Salam, Perkins Coie, LLP, Seattle, WA, for defendant-appellee Fiserv, Inc.
David Spencer Bloch, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for defendants-appellees Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Fulton Financial Corporation.
Eric Sophir, Dentons U.S. LLP, Washington, DC, for defendants-appellees Citigroup, Inc., Citibank, N.A. Also represented by Nicholas Hunt Jackson.
Baldassare Vinti, Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, NY, for defendant-appellee Eclipse Foundation, Inc. Also represented by Fabio Enrique Tarud.
Before Lourie, Moore, and Chen, Circuit Judges.
Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam, proceeding pro se, appeals multiple decisions from Judge Davila of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, including his dismissal of a patent infringement claim, dismissal of civil claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), dismissal of a claim of treason, and various other rulings. Dr. Arunachalam also challenges the decisions of other courts or other cases such as the denial of her writ for mandamus by the Ninth Circuit. For the reasons explained below, we affirm.
I. Procedural History
Dr. Arunachalam filed an initial complaint (Complaint) on February 26, 2018. The Complaint was filed against thirteen named defendants, including Apple, Inc., Samsung Electronics America, International Business Machines Corporation, SAP America, Inc., and JPMorgan Chase & Co., as well as unnamed Does 1-100 (collectively, Defendants). The Complaint is over 140 pages long and identifies a host of accusations against not only the named parties, but also numerous others including judges and attorneys involved in Dr. Arunachalam's other cases. Despite the voluminous discussion and plethora of accusations...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP