Cases

ORDER ON MARVELL’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Re: Dkt. No. 137 WILLIAM H. ORRICK, United States District Judge Defendant Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. (“Marvell”), moves for summary judgment that U.S. Patent 5,446,747 (“the '747 Patent”) is invalid because Claims 1 and 10 are merely mathematical algorithms or abstract ideas, and are not transformative or limited applications of those al

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge LINN, with whom LOURIE and BRYSON, Circuit Judges, join. Concurring-in-part, dissenting-in-part opinion filed by Circuit Judge GAJARSA, •with whom NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, joins. LINN, Circuit Judge. This patent infringement action concerns Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory (“SDRAM”) and Double Data Rate SDRAM memory (“DDR SDRAM”), in standard use in many

WINTER, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs-appellees petition for rehearing following our decision in In re Repetitive Stress Injury Litig., 11 F.3d 368 (2d Cir.1993). They argue that our sua sponte grant of a writ of mandamus deprived both them and the district court of an opportunity to oppose mandamus relief. Furthermore, petitioners claim that events in the underlying litigation subsequent to the filing of the a

WINTER, Circuit Judge: Defendants-appellants International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”) and Wang Laboratories, Inc. (“Wang”) appeal from Judge Weinstein’s order (“Weinstein Order”), In re: Repetitive Stress Injury Cases, 142 F.R.D. 584 (E.D.N.Y.1992), granting the plaintiffs-appellees’ motion to consolidate the forty-four cases in the Eastern District of New York that assert a claim for damages for “

608 F.Supp.2d 1166 (2009) SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC., Plaintiff, v. HYNIX SEMICONDUCTOR INC., et al., Defendants. No. C 06-1665 PJH. United States District Court, N.D. California. March 31, 2009. *1169 Christine Elaine Cwiertny, Daniel Allen Sasse, Theresa C. Lopez, Crowell & Moring LLP, Irvine, CA, David Daniel Cross, Jerome A. M

PER CURIAM: We assume familiarity with the factual and procedural background of this dispute as laid out in our previous decisions. In In re Repetitive Stress Injury Litig., 11 F.3d 368 (2d Cir.1993), we held that the district court abused its discretion by consolidating forty-four cases representing a wide range of both factual and legal contexts, and we granted mandamus relief sua sponte.

531 F.Supp.2d 1084 (2007) SEMICONDUCTOR ENERGY LABORATORY COMPANY LTD., Plaintiff, v. CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS CORP., et al., Defendant(s). No. C 04-04675 MHP. United States District Court, N.D. California. June 19, 2007. *1085 *1086 *1087

Leo T. Sorokin, United States District Judge In this intellectual property dispute, Plaintiffs Crane Security Technologies, Inc. and Visual Physics, LLC (together, "Crane") alleged that Defendant Rolling Optics AB ("RO") infringed five of Crane's patents. RO moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, and the Court denied that motion. Doc. No. 34. RO then asserted defenses and counterclaims for declaratory judgment of invali

485 F.Supp.2d 1089 (2007) SEMICONDUCTOR ENERGY LABORATORY COMPANY LTD., Plaintiff, v. CHI MEI OPTOELECTRONICS CORP., et al., Defendant(s). No. C 04-04675 MHP. United States District Court, N.D. California. April 19, 2007. *1090 *1091 *1092

Case: 23-1841 Document: 50 Page: 1 Filed: 03/24/2025 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ WASH WORLD INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. BELANGER INC., FKA PISTON OPW INC., Defendant-Appellee ______________________ 2023-1841 ______________________ Appeal from the United Sta

2024 IL App (1st) 220886 Nos. 1-22-0886 & 1-22-0891 (consolidated) Opinion filed: February 29, 2024 FIRST DISTRICT FOURTH DIVISION No. 1-22-0891 MARCUS LEDEAUX, a Disabled Person , ) Appeal from the by His Co-Guardians and Co-Conservators )

Vitaform, Inc. v. Aeroflow, Inc., 2022 NCBC 65. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION BUNCOMBE COUNTY 19 CVS 3707 VITAFORM, INC. d/b/a BODY AFTER BABY, Plaintiff, v. ORDER AND OPINION ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AEROFLOW, INC. an

ORDER SAM SPARKS, District Judge. BE IT REMEMBERED on this day the Court reviewed the file in the above-styled cause, and specifically Defendants ErgoS-cience, Inc., Deborah E. Lechner, and Does (l-300)’s Motion for Partial Reconsideration of Court’s 4/20/15 Order [# 47], Plaintiff WorkSTEPS, Inc.’s Response [# 51] thereto, Plaintiffs Opposed Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint [# 56], D

Case: 19-2192 Document: 60 Page: 1 Filed: 10/23/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ TECSEC, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant v. ADOBE INC., Defendant-Cross-Appellant SAS INSTITUTE, INC., SAP AMERICA, INC., SAP AG, CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., SYBASE, INC., SOFTWARE AG, SOFTWARE AG, INC., ORACLE CORPORATIO

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON, United States District Judge *854On May 4, 2017, Plaintiff filed a complaint against Praxair, Inc. ("Praxair") and Fiba Technologies, Inc. ("Fiba") for injuries sustained from an explosion involving a hydrogen trailer (the "Trailer"). Compl., ECF No. 1. On December 19, 2017, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint adding Defendants Fike Corporation ("F

MEMORANDUM OPINION ROBINSON, District Judge I. INTRODUCTION In June 2015, plaintiff Evolved Wireless, LLC (“plaintiff’) brought separate patent infringement actions against the following defendants: Apple, Inc.; HTC Corporation; HTC America, Inc.; Lenovo Group Ltd.; Lenovo (United States) Inc.; Motorola Mobility; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; ZTE (USA) I

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER VIRGINIA M. KENDALL, District Judge. In early 2010, plaintiff Trading Technologies International, Inc. (“TT”) filed a dozen cases in this District alleging infringement of various patents concerning electronic trading software that traders use to place orders on electronic ex*1029changes like Chicago’s Me

MEMORANDUM DuBois, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION This case involves three design patents owned by PACCAR, Inc. PACCAR designs and manufactures heavy duty trucks. *671Dorman Products, Inc., which supplies automotive replacement parts, filed a Complaint against PACCAR in this Court. In the Complaint, Dorman seeks a declarat

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE JAMES RIVEST, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 2019-0848-PWG ) HAUPPAUGE DIGITAL, INC., ) ) Defendant.

ANTHONY W. ISHII, SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE This is a business dispute involving intellectual property and trade secrets between Plaintiff Deerpoint Group, Inc. ("Deerpoint") and Defendants Agrigenix, LLC ("Agrigenix") and Sean Mahoney ("Mahoney").1 Deerpoint brings federal *1217claims for violations of