Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

2 opinions for “U.S. Philips Corporation v. Pantech Wireless, Inc.”

Golden Bridge Technology, Inc. v. Apple Inc.public domain

District Court, D. Delaware · 2013-04-09 · Published · cited 0× · 937 F. Supp. 2d 490; 2013 WL 1426993

MEMORANDUM OPINION SUE L. ROBINSON, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION The court in this memorandum opinion construes limitations in U.S. Patent Nos. 6,574,267 B1 (“the'267 patent”), as reexamined,1 and 7,359,427 B2 (“the'427 patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit”). Golden Bridge Technology, Inc. (“GBT”) has asserted infringement of the patents-in-suit

read the full opinion · at the source · see the docket → · company profile: Apple Inc. → · find the judge →

Fractus, S.A. v. Samsung Electronics Co.public domain

District Court, E.D. Texas · 2012-06-28 · Published · cited 7× · 876 F. Supp. 2d 802; 2012 WL 2505741; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90284

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER LEONARD DAVIS, District Judge. Before the Court are the parties’ post-trial motions. Having considered the parties’ written submissions and oral arguments, the Court: DENIES Samsung’s Renewed Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law that: (1) Samsung Does Not Infringe Any Claim of the Patents-in-Suit; (2) the Asserted Claims of the Patents-in-Suit are Invalid; (3) Samsung is No

read the full opinion · at the source · see the docket → · company profile: Samsung Electronics Co. → · find the judge →