I took a quick look at the procedural history of the case (see https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16272543/neo4j-inc-v-purethink-llc/ https://www.courtlistene

I took a quick look at the procedural history of the case (see https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16272543/neo4j-inc-v-purethink-llc/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16272543/neo4j-inc-v-pu...). In the original filing, there were only essentially trademark complaints, although this was later amended to include a copyright complaint. The request for summary judgement didn't ask for summary judgement on all of the claims--only the trademark claim. Thus, the copyright violation bits are still a live controversy (undergoing discovery for roughly the next several months) and would presumably be resolved by the actual jury trial requested, whenever that comes about.