Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mallgren v. Microsoft Corp.

United States District Court, S.D. New York

October 3, 2013

ANTHONY BRIAN MALLGREN, Plaintiff,
v.
MICROSOFT CORPORATION and APPLE INCORPORATED, Defendants

Anthony Brian Mallgren, Plaintiff, Pro se, Spokane, WA.

For Microsoft Corporation, Defendant: Jalina Joy Hudson, Perkins Coie LLP, New York, NY.

For Apple Incorporated, Defendant: Thomas M. Crispi, LEAD ATTORNEY, Schiff Hardin.Com, New York, NY.

OPINION

Page 452

OPINION AND ORDER

JAMES L. COTT, United States Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Anthony Brian Mallgren (" Mallgren" ), appearing pro se, has brought this diversity action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, alleging a variety of claims against Microsoft Corporation (" Microsoft" ) and Apple Incorporated (" Apple" ) (collectively, " Defendants" ). Specifically, Mallgren contends that Defendants " have committed tortuous [sic] acts, breached law of contract, created a fraudulent representation of their motives and operation, violating the foundation of which the law provides." Amended Complaint filed February 8, 2013 (" Am. Compl." ) (Doc. No. 6), at ¶ II. 3. Mallgren also asserts that Defendants " traded information, knowledge or strategy in a metaphysical exchange which went unnoted in any physical abstract of currency or value transaction." Id. at ¶ II. 16.

Microsoft has moved to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on the grounds that (1) Mallgren has failed to allege any facts establishing that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction; (2) the facts as alleged by Mallgren fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; and (3) Mallgren's allegations are frivolous. Apple has also moved to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), on the grounds that (1) Mallgren has failed to state a plausible claim for relief; and (2) Mallgren's allegations are frivolous. Apple also requests that Mallgren be denied leave to amend and that Mallgren should be enjoined or warned from filing further actions. The parties have consented to have me preside over this motion under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (Doc. No. 34). For the reasons that follow, Defendants' motions to dismiss are granted and the amended complaint is dismissed in its entirety. Mallgren is also warned that further duplicative or frivolous litigation in this Court will result in an order barring him from filing new actions without prior permission of the Court.

I. Background

A. Mallgren's Allegations

The following facts are taken from the amended complaint, and, to the extent they are intelligible, are accepted as true for purposes of this motion. Mallgren alleges that he was employed by Microsoft from 2005 to 2007. Am. Compl. ¶ I. 7. He asserts that over the course of his employment, his manager " pursued and engaged in sexual relations" with Mallgren's wife, " exploiting her background, young age and the organization values of Microsoft, utilizing them to create false pretenses." Id. at ¶ I. 8. He alleges that on one occasion, his manager supplied Mallgren's wife with " fake government identification[,]" for the purpose of purchasing alcohol, and took Mallgren's wife on " outings where [his manager] purchased alcohol for her while underage." Id. at ¶ I. 9-10.

Mallgren alleges further that his wife began exhibiting signs of " severe emotional distress" and engaged in " very self destructive behaviors." Id. at ¶ I. 11. When the events regarding the alleged misconduct of the manager were brought to Mallgren's attention, he claims that he spoke about them to his new manager, with human resources, and with media outlets. Id. He alleges that he was then " given his 2 weeks to look for another job, was immediately let go and escorted of [sic] the campus." Id. He further alleges that years after the manager's alleged misconduct, authorities informed Mallgren that he and his wife had a " very strong civil case and suggested pursuing damages" against the manager. Id. at ¶ I. 9.

Page 453

Mallgren alleges that after leaving Microsoft he " secured venture capitalists and biopharmaceutical organizations as clients" and started a business in Spokane, Washington. Id. at ¶ I. 12. He also claims to have filed a patent application " for technologies concerning semantic search." Id. at ¶ I. 13. He alleges that when he reported to his clients that he was switching from a services model to an intellectual property model and his rates were going to change, his clients discontinued his services. Id. Mallgren then went back to Bellevue, Washington. Id.

Mallgren alleges further that he was hired by Audience Intelligence, a division of Microsoft. Id. at ¶ I. 14. He alleges that he informed his manager at Audience Intelligence about his patent. Id. Mallgren alleges that his manager at Audience Intelligence told him that there was no conflict of interest between Mallgren's patent and Mallgren's work at Audience Intelligence, and that Mallgren could continue working. Id. Mallgren alleges that he explained his patent to his manager after his manager " grew curious" about it. Id. He further alleges that his manager " grew excited" about the patent and told Mallgren that he " would soon be introduced to many of the senior leadership team members." Id.

Mallgren alleges that his manager at Audience Intelligence called Mallgren into his office and asked Mallgren what he would choose " if Microsoft forced his decision of either given [sic] up his patent and working for Microsoft or continuing his work." Id. at ¶ I. 15. Mallgren alleges that he told his manager that he wanted to continue working at Microsoft since there was no conflict of interest. Id. However, if he was forced to pursue one or the other, he would choose to keep his intellectual property. Id. Mallgren alleges that his manager then asked Mallgren to leave his office and escorted Mallgren off the campus without allowing Mallgren to go back to his work station. Id.

Mallgren alleges that he had " committed to a lease term," but " fell short on his planned budget and could not pay the fees proper to continuing his patent due to breach of contract without proper known cause." Id. at ¶ I. 16.

Mallgren also alleges that Microsoft acquired Powerset, which was a company in direct competition with Collective Knowledge Linguistics, the company that Mallgren was creating ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.