Cases

ORDER RICHARD A. JONES, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This matter comes before the court on a motion to dismiss from Defendant Huawei *1189Device USA, Inc. (“Huawei USA”) and a motion to dismiss from its Chinese parent company, Defendant Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. (“Huawei China”). Although the parties have requested o

Case: 19-60896 Document: 00515905664 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/18/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 18, 2021

ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE *677On November 29, 2017, the Court held an oral hearing to determine the proper construction of the disputed claim terms of the patents-in-suit. Having considered the parties claim-construction briefing and based on the intrinsic and extrinsic evidence, the Court construes the disputed te

MEMORANDUM ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION MICHAEL H. SCHNEIDER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE The above cases have been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Caroline M. Craven pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The September 19, 2014 Report of the magistrate judge which contains her proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such actions has been presented for

OPINION AND ORDER JOHN G. KOELTL, District Judge: This action arises out of an arbitration between the petitioner, InterDigital Communications, Inc. and several InterDigital entities (collectively “InterDigital”), and the respondent, Huawei Investment & Holding Co. and several Huawei entities (collectively “Huawei”). The parties spent several years litigating and negotiating a licensing sch

William H. Orrick, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Huawei Device USA, Inc. and Huawei Technologies USA, Inc. (collectively, "Huawei") and defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Research America, Inc. (collectively, "Samsung") are major players in the world of wireless telecommunications-a world gov

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge Reyna. Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge Moore. Reyna, Circuit Judge. Profectus Technology LLC (“Profectus”) appeals a district court’s claim construction order and grant of summary judgment of non-infringement. The patent-in-suit is directed to a mountable digital picture frame for displaying digital images. Pro-fectus asserted ce

Clark Waddoups, United States District Judge Before the court is Defendant Alarm.com Incorporated's Motion to Stay Pending Conclusion of Ex Parte Reexamination Proceedings, (ECF No. 235). On October 30, 2018, and November 5, 2018, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued Final Office Actions in ex parte reexaminations rejecting nine of the seventeen claims asserted in this action as invalid under

ANDREWS, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Presently before the Court is the Amazon Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (No. 16-1266, D.I. 12). The issues are fully briefed. (D.I. 13, 15, 17). The Court held oral argument on November 16, 2017.1 (D.I. 25). For the reasons that *359f

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RODNEY GILSTRAP, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is the Joint Renewed Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Declaring All Asserted Patent Claims Invalid Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Dkt. No. 539 in the -1112 case; Dkt. No. 191 in the -61 case) (“Mot.”) filed by Defendants Motorola Mobility, • LLC, Amazon.com, Inc., Apple Inc., .Google, Inc., Huawei Technol

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE US DOMINION, INC., DOMINION ) VOTING SYSTEMS, INC., and ) DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS ) CORPORATION, ) C.A. No.: N21C-08-063 EMD ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. )

JAMES L. ROBART, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Before the court are: (1) Defendant Mitsubishi Aircraft Corporation America, Inc.'s ("MITAC America") motion to dismiss certain claims (MITACA MTD (Dkt. # 54)); and (2) Defendants Aerospace Testing Engineering & Certification, Inc. ("AeroTEC"), Michel Korwin-Szymanowski, Laurus Basson, and Cindy Dornéval's (collectively, "AeroTEC Defe

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR., United States District Judge On March 4, 2014, Plaintiff BrightEdge Technologies, Inc. ("BrightEdge") brought this patent infringement action against Defendants Searchmetrics, GmbH. and Searchmetrics, Inc. (collectively, "Searchmetrics"). See Dkt. No. 1. The operative complaint asserts infringement of United States Patent Nos. 8,135,706 ("the '706 Patent"), 8,478,700 ("the '700 Patent"), 8,478,746

DECISION DENYING CONFIRMATION OF DEBTORS’ THIRD AMENDED JOINT PLAN PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 11 OF BANKRUPTCY CODE SHELLEY C. CHAPMAN, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE TABLE OF CONTENTS I. BACKGROUND ...62 A. The Third Amended Plan ... 64 B. Motions Filed in Connection with Confirmation ... 66

MEMORANDUM & ORDER YOUNG, D.J. I. INTRODUCTION This is a securities class action on behalf of persons and entities who purchased Acacia Communications, Inc. common stock. Lead plaintiffs WKW Partners Fund I, L.P. ("WKW Partners"), Hui Zhang ("Zhang"), and Chris Kebler ("Kebler"), together with plaintiff Rina Rollhaus ("Rollhaus" and collectively with WKW Partners, Zhang, a

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND CONSOLIDATED AMENDED COMPLAINT (Docket No. 304) EDWARD M. CHEN, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiffs in this multidistrict litigation— eighteen (18) individuals from thirteen different states — have filed a second consolidated amended complaint (“SCAC” or

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND FINAL JUDGMENT RODNEY. GILSTRAP, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Iris Connex filed suit against eighteen manufacturers of smartphones and tablets, claiming each infringed the Plaintiffs only asset, U.S. Patent No. 6,177,950, which is entitled “Multifunction*832al portable telephone.”

TARANTO, Circuit Judge. Huawei Device USA Inc. and Futurewei Technologies, Inc. (collectively, “Huawei”) appeal a district court’s dismissal of their complaint. We affirm. Background Access Co., Ltd., which sells software for mobile communication devices, owns the five patents at issue in this appeal (“the five patents”). On July

Alan S. Trust, United States Bankruptcy Judge By this adversary proceeding, plaintiff, Devices Liquidation Trust (the "Trust" or "Plaintiff"), seeks to recover $3,824,194.36 of alleged avoidable transfers (the "Transfers") from defendant, KMT Wireless, LLC d/b/a CynergyHitech ("KMT" or the "Defendant"). KMT seeks summary judgment on the Trust's preference claims based on an argument that it was a critical vendor of one of the Debt

Case: 23-50491 Document: 86-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/04/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit ____________ FILED April 4, 2024 No. 23-50491