Following the meeting, CogniSens drafted a contract to formalize an arrangement with Bates as an independent contractor with the official title of Executive Director Business Development, US Public Education Market. Bates did not intimate that he intended to direct his efforts specifically toward Tennessee school systems, and Castonguay communicated that he wanted to pursue sales to school systems throughout the United States. Bates offered his services to that end, and on October 14, 2012, Castonguay and Bates met in Washington, D.C. Bates proposed that CogniSens-which had previously focused its NeuroTracker marketing and sales efforts on athletics, military special forces, and medical applications-consider targeting the United States public education sector. Bates's interest in CogniSens centered on the company's core product, the NeuroTracker, a technology that Castonguay defines as "a 3D visual exercise that trains the brain and strengthens mental muscles by targeting core mental skills such as attention, awareness, working memory and processing abilities." (Docket No. CogniSens is a Canadian company located in Montreal, Quebec. The lab put Bates in touch with Jean Castonguay, then the President and CEO of CogniSens. In the fall of 2012, Bates contacted a University of Montreal lab regarding research and news coverage detailing the lab's work with tools to detect and measure learning disabilities in school-age children. He has worked in the educational technology industry in Tennessee for approximately thirty years, primarily in sales. The facts are viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.īates is a resident of Rutherford, Tennessee. For the reasons discussed herein, CogniSens' motion will be denied. 12), and CogniSens has filed a Reply (Docket No. ("CogniSens"), to which the plaintiff, Robert Bates, has filed a Response (Docket No. 7), filed by the defendant, CogniSens Athletics, Inc. Pending before the court is a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rules 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Docket No.
0 kommentar(er)
