Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1
|
|
- Rodger Gilmore
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 Frank M. Gasparo Todd M. Nosher VENABLE LLP 1270 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York Telephone No.: (212) Facsimile No.: (212) FMGasparo@venable.com TMNosher@venable.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Smart Light Source Company, LLC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SMART LIGHT SOURCE COMPANY, LLC, Plaintiff, v. RAILHEAD CORPORATION; DANIEL MESSER; and CANADA INC. d/b/a DIVVALI LIGHTING INC. Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-3203 DOCUMENT FILED ELECTRONICALLY JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff Smart Light Source Company, LLC ( SLS ) ("SLS") for its Complaint for Declaratory Judgment of Non-infringement against Defendants Railhead Corporation ("Railhead"); ( Railhead ); Daniel Messer; and Canada Inc. d/b/a Divvali Lighting Inc. ("Divvali"), ( Divvali ), collectively ("Defendants"), ( Defendants ), hereby states and alleges as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION 1. Thisis isan an action arising under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq., and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C , seeking a declaratory
2 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 2 of 10 PageID #: 2 judgment of non-infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,499,180 ( the ("the 180 '180 Patent"), Patent ), and for other relief against Defendants as the Court deems just and proper. PARTIES 2. Plaintiff SLS is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of Delaware and having a principal place of business at 2635 E. 24th Street, Ste. 3, Brooklyn, New York, SLS is a leading manufacturer of high standard and innovative LED lighting products for use in, inter alia, locomotive and transit car applications. 3. On information and belief, Defendant Railhead is a privately held corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois and having a principal place of business at 224 Shore Court, Burr Ridge, Illinois, Railhead purports to be the co-owner, along with Defendant Daniel Messer, of all rights, title and interest in in and to to the 180 '180 Patent. On information and belief, named co-inventor of the 180 '180 Patent, Joseph Dorman, Donnan, is President of Railhead. 4. On information and belief, Defendant Daniel Messer is an individual residing at 5622 Blossom Avenue, Cote St-Luc, Quebec, Québec, Canada, H4W 2T1. Daniel Messer purports to be the coowner, along with Defendant Railhead, of all rights, title and interest in and to the 180 '180 Patent. On information and belief, Daniel Messer is President of Defendant Divvali. 5. On information and belief, Defendant Divvali is a privately held Canadian corporation doing business as Divvali Lighting Inc. (also known as Divvali LED Lighting & Design) with its principal place of business at 146 Promenade Ronald, Montreal, Montréal, Quebec, Québec, Canada, H4X 1M8. On information and belief, Divvali has certain unrecorded rights to the 180 '180 Patent, or is otherwise seeking to enforce rights in the 180 '180 Patent. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to at least federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338(a) and the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C , and under the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. 1 et seq. 2
3 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 3 of 10 PageID #: 3 7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Railhead because Railhead has directly and/or indirectly committed acts within New York giving rise to this action and has established minimum contacts with New York such that the exercise of jurisdiction would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 8. Moreover and in addition to the reasons for personal jurisdiction stated supra, Defendant Railhead further availed itself to personal jurisdiction in New York by, inter alia, sending its cease and desist letters to SLS and threatening suit against SLS as discussed infra. On information and belief, Railhead is fully aware of the United States Supreme Court s Court's ruling in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Grp. Brands LLC, 137 S. Ct (2017) a decision which predates Railhead s Railhead's aforementioned letters. Accordingly, Railhead understands it must sue SLS for its claims of alleged infringement of the 180 '180 Patent in the venue where SLS resides (where it is incorporated) or where SLS has a regular and established place of business. SLS is incorporated in Delaware and has its regular and established place of business in New York and within this Judicial District. To carry out its specific threat of litigation against SLS, Railhead must be willingly to submit to the personal jurisdiction of this Court. By sending its cease and desist letters with threats of patent litigation against a company having a regular and established place of business in New York and within this Judicial District, and being aware that proper venue of such patent infringement action rests in this jurisdiction, Railhead has waived any argument that jurisdiction is not proper in the State of New York and within this Judicial District. 9. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Daniel Messer because Daniel Messer has directly and/or indirectly committed acts within New York giving rise to this action and has established minimum contacts with New York such that the exercise of jurisdiction would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 10. Moreover and in addition to the reasons for personal jurisdiction stated supra, Defendant Daniel Messer further availed himself to personal jurisdiction in New York by, inter alia, sending his cease and desist letter to SLS and threatening suit against SLS as discussed infra. On information and belief, Daniel Messer is fully aware of the United States Supreme 3
4 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 4 of 10 PageID #: 4 Court's Court s ruling in TC Heartland LLC, 137 S. Ct a decision which predates Daniel Messer's Messer s aforementioned letter. Accordingly, Daniel Messer understands he must sue SLS for his claims of alleged infringement of the 180 '180 Patent in the venue where SLS resides (where it is incorporated) or where SLS has a regular and established place of business. SLS is incorporated in Delaware and has its regular and established place of business in New York and within this Judicial District. To carry out his specific threat of litigation against SLS, Daniel Messer must be willingly to submit to the personal jurisdiction of this Court. By sending his cease and desist letter with threats of patent litigation against a company having a regular and established place of business in New York and within this Judicial District, and being aware that proper venue of such patent infringement action rests in this jurisdiction, Daniel Messer has waived any argument that jurisdiction is not proper in the State of New York and within this Judicial District. 11. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Divvali because Divvali has directly and/or indirectly committed acts within New York giving rise to this action and has established minimum contacts with New York such that the exercise of jurisdiction would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 12. Moreover and in addition to the reasons for personal jurisdiction stated supra, Defendant Divvali further availed itself to personal jurisdiction in New York by, inter alia, sending its cease and desist letter to SLS and threatening suit against SLS as discussed infra. On information and belief, Divvali is fully aware of the United States Supreme Court s Court's ruling in TC Heartland LLC, 137 S. Ct a decision which predates Divvali's Divvali s aforementioned letter. Accordingly, Divvali understands it must sue SLS for its claims of alleged infringement of the 180 `180 Patent in the venue where SLS resides (where it is incorporated) or where SLS has a regular and established place of business. SLS is incorporated in Delaware and has its regular and established place of business in New York and within this Judicial District. To carry out its specific threat of litigation against SLS, Divvali must be willingly to submit to the personal jurisdiction of this Court. By sending its cease and desist letter with threats of patent litigation against a company having a regular and established place of business in New York and within 4
5 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 5 of 10 PageID #: 5 this Judicial District, and being aware that proper venue of such patent infringement action rests in this jurisdiction, Divvali has waived any argument that jurisdiction is not proper in the State of New York and within this Judicial District. 13. Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and (c) as this Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants and because a substantial part of the events giving rise to this declaratory judgment action occurred in this District. THE PATENT-IN-SUIT 14. The ' Patent, entitled "Locomotive Locomotive Headlamp" Headlamp issued on November 22, 2016 by the United States Patent and Trademark Office ( PTO ). ("PTO"). A copy of the ' Patent is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 15. The ' Patent lists Joseph Dorman Donnan of Oak Lawn, Illinois and Defendant Daniel Messer as named inventors. 16. The ' Patent lists Defendant Railhead and Defendant Danial Messer as named Applicants. 17. Defendants Railhead and Daniel Messer, together through their collective accusations of infringement and threats of litigation discussed infra, purport to be co-owners of the 180 '180 Patent. 18. On information and belief, Defendant Divvali has certain unrecorded rights to the 180 `180 Patent, or is otherwise seeking to enforce rights in the ' Patent. Indeed, given Defendants' Defendants May 17, 2018 cease and desist letter and threats of litigation to SLS on Divvali letterhead, by and through Divvali s Divvali's in-house counsel, and in view of counsel s counsel's use of the term "we" we throughout her letter (instead of referring to Daniel Messer alone), there is sufficient cause for SLS to believe that Divvali has some interest in and to the 180 '180 Patent. CASE AND CONTROVERSY 19. The Declaratory Judgment Act provides courts with jurisdiction over declaratory judgment actions when there is a justiciable case or controversy. Medlmmune, MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., 549 U.S. 118, (2007) (citing 28 U.S.C. 2201(a)). A controversy exists when "the the 5
6 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 6 of 10 PageID #: 6 facts alleged, under all the circumstances, show that there is a substantial controversy, between parties having adverse legal interests, of sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment. judgment." Medlmmune, MedImmune, 549 U.S. at On September 27, 2017, Railhead served a letter dated September 25, 2017 on SLS enclosing a copy of the 180 '180 Patent, and stating that SLS "infringes infringes upon one or more claims set forth in the ' [Patent]." [Patent]. A true and correct copy of Railhead's Railhead s September 27, 2017 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Railhead's Railhead s letter specifically alleged that SLS SLS' product bearing Item Code No. 50LEDPAR56/SP 75V directly and/or indirectly infringes one or more claims of the ' Patent, and demanded that SLS "cease cease and desist from manufacturing, contracting for the manufacture, importing, distributing, offering for sale, and selling" selling the foregoing product immediately. Additionally, Railhead made direct threats of legal action, to wit: Railhead will not condone nor ignore this infringement and intends to hold SLS legally accountable. Railhead will seek fair and reasonable compensation for the patent infringement. Accordingly, Railhead reiterates its demand as set forth in this letter. Should SLS fail to comply with the demand completely and in a timely fashion as exclusively determined by Railhead, Railhead will pursue any and all of its legal remedies to the fullest extent of the law. Absent complete compliance with the demand made herein, Railhead may initiate litigation in the United States District Court for the District of Illinois' 1 [sic] for statutory damages, actual damages equivalent to sales generated by SLS as a result of this infringement, and for all other rights and remedies available at law and in equity. 21. Railhead's Railhead s September 27, 2017 Letter offered no factual or legal explanation underlying its claims of infringement. 22. On October 4, 2017, SLS responded through counsel acknowledging receipt of Railhead's Railhead s September 27, 2017 letter. Specifically, SLS stated that it was reviewing the claims set forth therein and invited a teleconference between counsel to discuss the matter in further detail. A true and correct copy of SLS' SLS October 4, 2017 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 1 While currently there is no United States District Court for the District of Illinois, SLS presumes Railhead means the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois given Railhead's Railhead s commercial address. Regardless, and as stated supra, Railhead's Railhead s letter was sent months after the TC Heartland decision which makes clear that Railhead cannot file suit for patent infringement against SLS in any jurisdiction other than this Court or the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. 6
7 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 7 of 10 PageID #: Ostensibly declining SLS SLS' proffer for a teleconference, Railhead sent a follow-up letter on October 12, 2017, reasserting its claims of infringement and threats of legal action. A true and correct copy of Railhead s Railhead's October 12, 2017 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit D. 24. Railhead's Railhead s October 12, 2017 letter once again offered no factual or legal explanation underlying its claims of infringement. 25. That same day, SLS responded by letter seeking clarification of Railhead's Railhead s accusations given the lack of substantive analysis in Railhead s Railhead's letters, and further inviting a teleconference between counsel. A true and correct copy of SLS SLS' October 12, 2017 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 26. On October 20, 2017, SLS wroteto to Railhead refutingrailhead's Railhead s infringement allegations as baseless. SLS further represented that it had not sold a single unit of the product accused in Railhead s Railhead's letters. And despiterailhead's Railhead s infirm accusations of infringement, in an effort to avoid litigation, SLS agreed not to sell, or offer to sell, the specific product accused in Railhead's Railhead s prior letters as expressly identified by Item Code No. 50LEDPAR56/SP 75V. SLS made no other concessions in its letter. A true and correct copy of SLS' SLS October 20, 2017 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit F. 27. That same day, Railhead responded by letter stating, inter alia, that it would not consider the dispute resolved until SLS SLS' full compliance with all ofrailhead's Railhead s demands, including the new demand of "immediate immediate and continuous relinquishment of SLS from participating in this market. market." A true and correct copy of Railhead's Railhead s October 20, 2017 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit G. 28. Railhead's Railhead s October 20, 2017 Letter still offered no factual or legal explanation underlying its claims of infringement. 29. On October 23, 2017, SLS responded to Railhead by letter stating that there "there is no agreement by SLS not to sell any products moving forward in 'in this market market' or any other market. market." A true and correct copy of SLS SLS' October 23, 2017 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit H. 30. Railhead never responded to SLS SLS' October 23, 2017 Letter. 7
8 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 8 of 10 PageID #: On May 17, 2018 Defendants Daniel Messer and Divvali, through their shared counsel, wrote to SLS accusing it of infringing the 180 '180 Patent and stating that the "[fjailure [f]ailure to address the issues in a substantive manner, such as withdrawing the infringing lamp from commercial distribution will result in no other choice but to institute legal proceedings in order to ensure the respect of the 180 '180 patent." patent. Moreover, because this letter referenced certain of the aforementioned correspondence between Railhead and SLS, correspondence to which only SLS and Railhead were privy, there is sufficient cause for SLS to believe that Railhead was indirectly involved in the drafting and/or sending of this letter. A true and correct copy of Defendants' Defendants May 17, 2017 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit I. 32. Defendants' Defendants May 17, 2018 Letter accuses SLS product bearing Item Code No. 75VDC-60W-LED-PAR56 (the Accused "Accused Product ) Product") as infringing the 180 '180 Patent. 33. Defendants' Defendants May 17, 2018 Letter offered no factual or legal explanation underlying their claim of infringement. 34. Because all alleged owners of the 180 '180 Patent have now accused SLS of infringing the ' Patent and have each threatened litigation, an actual, substantial and justiciable controversy exists between SLS and Defendants concerning SLS SLS' non-infringement of the 180 '180 Patent, namely with respect to the Accused Product. COUNT ONE (Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of the 180 '180 Patent) 35. SLS incorporates herein by reference all allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 34 above. 36. No claim of the 180 '180 Patent has been or is infringed by SLS' SLS Accused Product, either directly or indirectly, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 37. No claim of the ' Patent has been oris is willfully infringed by SLS' SLS Accused Product. 38. Accordingly, an actual and justiciable controversy exists between SLS and Defendants concerning SLS SLS' non-infringement of of the 180 '180 Patent. As a result of Defendants' Defendants 8
9 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 9 of 10 PageID #: 9 acts described in the foregoing paragraphs, there exists a substantial controversy of sufficient immediacy and reality between Defendants, on the one hand, and SLS, on the other hand, to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment that SLS SLS' Accused Product has not and does not infringe directly or indirectly, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, any claim of the 180 '180 Patent. JURY DEMAND 39. SLS demands a trial by jury of all issues triable of right by jury. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, SLS respectfully requests: A) A declaration that SLS SLS' Accused Product has not and does not infringe, willfully or otherwise, either directly or indirectly, any claim of the 180 '180 Patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents; B) An order that Defendants and each of their officers, employees, agents, attorneys, and any persons in active concert or participation with them are restrained and enjoined from further prosecuting or instituting any action against claiming that the 180 '180 Patent is infringed by SLS; C) A declaration that this an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. 285, and awarding SLS its costs, expenses and attorneys attorneys' fees; and D) Any other relief that the Court deems just and proper. 9
10 Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/31/18 Page 10 of 10 PageID #: 10 Respectfully submitted, Dated: May 31, 2018 /s/frank M. Gasparo Frank M. Gasparo Frank M. Gasparo Todd M. Nosher VENABLE LLP 1270 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York Telephone No.: (212) Facsimile No.: (212) FMGasparo@venable.com TMNosher@venable.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Smart Light Source Company, LLC 10
Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1
Case 1:16-cv-00065 Document 1 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION PRAXAIR, INC., PRAXAIR TECHNOLOGY, INC. Plaintiffs,
COMPLAINT. Plaintiff, The Green Pet Shop Enterprises, LLC ( Green Pet Shop or. Plaintiff ), by and through its attorneys, THE RANDO LAW FIRM P.C.
Case 1:18-cv-04526 Document 1 Filed 08/09/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 Attorneys for Plaintiff: THE RANDO LAW FIRM P.C. 6800 Jericho Turnpike Suite 120W Syosset, NY 11791 (516) 799-9800 CARLSON, GASKEY
Case 1:07-cv MRB Document 6 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Case 1:07-cv-00852-MRB Document 6 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION ESCORT, INC., Plaintiff, V. COBRA ELECTRONICS CORPORATION,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION, AKRON
- - 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION, AKRON Pain Management Technologies, Inc., ) 0 Home Ave., Bldg. A ) Case No. Akron, Ohio 0, ) ) Judge Plaintiff,
Case 1:17-cv WJM Document 1 Filed 06/08/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:17-cv-01399-WJM Document 1 Filed 06/08/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 Civil Action No. CHERWELL SOFTWARE, LLC, v. Plaintiff, BMC SOFTWARE, INC., Defendant. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
Case 6:18-cv ADA Document 26 Filed 01/11/19 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION
Case 6:18-cv-00055-ADA Document 26 Filed 01/11/19 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS WACO DIVISION RETROLED COMPONENTS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. PRINCIPAL LIGHTING
Plaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC ( Plaintiff ) complains and alleges as follows against Defendant Gimme Gimme, LLC ( Defendant ).
0 0 Robert J. Lauson (,) bob@lauson.com Edwin P. Tarver, (0,) edwin@lauson.com LAUSON & TARVER LLP 0 Apollo St., Suite. 0 El Segundo, CA 0 Tel. (0) -0 Fax (0) -0 Attorneys for Plaintiff Privacy Pop, LLC
Case 3:16-cv MEJ Document 1 Filed 06/16/16 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-0-mej Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 Andrea Gothing, SBN: 0 AGothing@RobinsKaplan.com Seth A. Northrop, SBN: 0 SNorthrup@RobinsKaplan.com Li Zhu, SBN: 00 LZhu@RobinsKaplan.com 0 W. El Camino
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. Case No. COMPLAINT FOR DECARATORY RELIEF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CARL ZEISS MEDITEC, INC. Plaintiff, v. OPTOVUE, INC. and MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, Defendants. Case No. JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
Case: 5:17-cv DCR Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/06/17 Page: 1 of 5 - Page ID#: 1
Case: 5:17-cv-00011-DCR Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/06/17 Page: 1 of 5 - Page ID#: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LEXINGTON DIVISION CHRISMAN MILL FARMS, LLC Plaintiff, Case No. v.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT AND INVALIDITY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION MEDICINE STORE PHARMACY, INC. d/b/a RXPRESS PHARMACY, CASE NO. 3:14-cv-2255 Plaintiff, v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED AFGIN PHARMA LLC, Defendant.
Case 6:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1
Case 6:15-cv-00380 Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1 POWER REGENERATION, LLC, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION v. Plaintiff, SIEMENS
Courthouse News Service
-\ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA PICTURE PATENTS, LLC, ) ) \.L Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Case No. j.'o&cv o?&>4' MONUMENT REALTY LLC, ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ) Defendant.
Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 35 Filed: 09/13/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:130
Case: 1:13-cv-01455 Document #: 35 Filed: 09/13/13 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:130 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION CASCADES STREAMING TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK COMPLAINT
Case 1:14-cv-08423-GBD Document 2 Filed 10/22/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Marshall Feature Recognition, LLC Plaintiff, V. Terra Holdings, LLC, 14-civ-8423
Case 3:13-cv M Document 60 Filed 12/19/14 Page 1 of 20 PageID 1778
Case 3:13-cv-04987-M Document 60 Filed 12/19/14 Page 1 of 20 PageID 1778 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ILIFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. NINTENDO
Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 03/10/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-00227 Document 1 Filed 03/10/17 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION BUILD A SIGN, LLC, Plaintiff, v. LANDMARK TECHNOLOGY, LLC,
Case 9:16-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2016 Page 1 of 6
Case 9:16-cv-80588-RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/15/2016 Page 1 of 6 SHIPPING and TRANSIT, LLC, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA vs. Plaintiff, STATE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Civil Action No: HON. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
2:14-cv-10207-SFC-LJM Doc # 1 Filed 01/16/14 Pg 1 of 7 Pg ID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION RGIS, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff, vs.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS VICTORIA DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS VICTORIA DIVISION MARK N. CHAFFIN Plaintiff, Civil Action No. v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MICHAEL R. BRADEN and LBC MANUFACTURING Defendants.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION. Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. COMPLAINT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PUBLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL, LTD., an Illinois Corporation, SD-X INTERACTIVE, INC., a Delaware Corporation v. Plaintiffs,
Case 1:14-cv REB Document 1 Filed 07/03/14 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:14-cv-00268-REB Document 1 Filed 07/03/14 Page 1 of 7 Christopher Cuneo, ISB No. 8557 Dana M. Herberholz, ISB No. 7440 Jamie K. Ellsworth, ISB No. 8372 PARSONS BEHLE & LATIMER 800 W. Main Street,
Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1
Case 2:16-cv-01388 Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MICOBA LLC Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. JURY
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Plaintiff Case No.: 1:17-cv-6236 COMPLAINT
Case 1:17-cv-06236 Document 1 Filed 08/17/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK THE GREEN PET SHOP ENTERPRISES, LLC, Plaintiff Case No.: 1:17-cv-6236
Case 3:17-cv AJB-KSC Document 1 Filed 05/23/17 PageID.1 Page 1 of 8
Case :-cv-00-ajb-ksc Document Filed 0// PageID. Page of 0 DAVID M. BECKWITH (CSB NO. 0) davidbeckwith@sandiegoiplaw.com TREVOR Q. CODDINGTON, PH.D. (CSB NO. 0) trevorcoddington@sandiegoiplaw.com JAMES
Case 3:17-cv Document 1 Filed 12/18/17 Page 1 of 8
Case :-cv-0 Document Filed // Page of Henry G. Wykowski (State Bar No. 0) Andrew F. Scher (State Bar No. 0) HENRY G. WYKOWSKI & ASSOCIATES Montgomery Street, Suite San Francisco, CA 0 Telephone: () - Facsimile:
Case 2:14-cv Document 1 Filed 10/10/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
Case 2:14-cv-00945 Document 1 Filed 10/10/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION TRAXXAS LP v. Plaintiff, HOBBY PRODUCTS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1
Case 2:16-cv-01392 Document 1 Filed 12/09/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MICOBA LLC Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. JURY
Case 2:18-cv Document 1 Filed 05/09/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1
Case 2:18-cv-00198 Document 1 Filed 05/09/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION SEMCON IP INC., Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL KORS
Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 01/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1
Case 6:14-cv-00035-JDL Document 1 Filed 01/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION PROPERTY DISCLOSURE TECHNOLOGIES LLC, v. Plaintiff,
Case 1:10-cv UNA Document 6 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:10-cv-00687-UNA Document 6 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, v. MOSAID TECHNOLOGIES INC., Defendant. C.A.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION MICROSOFT CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. IRON OAK TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, Defendant. Civil Action No. Jury Trial Requested
Case 1:06-cv JJF Document 1 Filed 05/03/06 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 224 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:06-cv-00291-JJF Document 1 Filed 05/03/06 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 224 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE BROADBAND TECHNOLOGY INNOVATIONS, LLC, and PIE SQUARED LLC,
Case 1:10-cv CMH -TRJ Document 1 Filed 09/08/10 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
Case 1:10-cv-01007-CMH -TRJ Document 1 Filed 09/08/10 Page 1 of 9 'ILED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION 01 COMMUNIQUE LABORATORY, INC. ) Cvf^
Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1
Case 1:18-cv-00608 Document 1 Filed 11/30/18 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS BEAUMONT DIVISION DRONE LABS LLC ) Plaintiffs, ) ) CASE NO. v.
Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 20 Filed: 04/11/11 Page 1 of 26 PageID #:217
Case: 1:10-cv-08050 Document #: 20 Filed: 04/11/11 Page 1 of 26 PageID #:217 FIRE 'EM UP, INC., v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION Plaintiff,
Case 1:12-cv SLR Document 18 Filed 08/27/12 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 71 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:12-cv-00809-SLR Document 18 Filed 08/27/12 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 71 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE PFIZER INC., WYETH LLC, WYETH PHARMACEUTICALS INC., and PF PRISM
Case 6:17-cv Document 1 Filed 07/27/17 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1
Case 6:17-cv-00433 Document 1 Filed 07/27/17 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION Ubiquitous Connectivity, LP, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL
Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 01/15/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1
Case 6:14-cv-00018-JDL Document 1 Filed 01/15/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION PROPERTY DISCLOSURE TECHNOLOGIES LLC, v. Plaintiff,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
Case 6:10-cv-00068-LED Document 1 Filed 02/27/2010 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION SONIX TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD v. Plaintiff, VTECH ELECTRONICS NORTH AMERICA,
Case 2:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE
Case 2:14-cv-00324-JDL Document 1 Filed 08/13/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE BRUNS DANIEL KIDD, Plaintiff, v. Case No. THE HOME DEPOT, INC. and RELIANCE WORLDWIDE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Apple, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. et al Doc. 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN APPLE INC. v. Plaintiff, MOTOROLA, INC. and MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION LakeSouth Holdings, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Ace Hardware Corporation, Defendant. Civil Action No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ORIGINAL
Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1
Case: 1:12-cv-03376 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/03/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION C&C POWER, INC. v. Plaintiff, C&D TECHNOLOGIES,
Case 1:15-cv CW Document 2 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:15-cv-00014-CW Document 2 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 5 Andrew S. Hansen (Utah Bar No. 9819; Email: Andrew@White-Knuckle.org) David A. Jones (Utah Bar No. 10134; Email: Dave@White-Knuckle.org) WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Case No. 3:12-cv-686
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN E-IMAGEDATA CORP. 340 Grant Street Hartford, WI 53027, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 3:12-cv-686 KONICA MINOLTA BUSINESS SOLUTIONS U.S.A., INC. 100 Williams
Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/27/18 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1
Case 1:18-cv-01866 Document 1 Filed 03/27/18 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------X AURORA LED TECHNOLOGY,
Case 1:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5
Case 1:11-cv-00636-REB Document 1 Filed 12/15/11 Page 1 of 5 Lane M. Chitwood, ISB No. 8577 lchitwood@parsonsbehle.com Peter M. Midgley, ISB No. 6913 pmidgley@parsonsbehle.com John N. Zarian, ISB No. 7390
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0 Document Filed /0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 Rodger K. Carreyn (Bar No. 0) rcarreyn@perkinscoie.com One East Main Street, Suite Madison, WI Telephone: 0--0 Facsimile: 0-- Michael J. Song (Bar No.
Case 2:07-cv RCJ-GWF Document 1 Filed 12/26/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case :0-cv-0-RCJ-GWF Document Filed //00 Page of MICHAEL R. MCCARTHY (NV Bar No. ) MICHAEL L. LARSEN (Utah Bar No. 0) DAVID M. BENNION (Utah Bar No. ) JOHN E. DELANEY (Utah Bar No. ) One Utah Center 0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SUNCAST CORPORATION, an Illinois corporation, vs. Plaintiff, SORENSEN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT TRUST, a California trust entity, Defendant. / COMPLAINT
Case: 1:17-cv Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/15/17 1 of 12. PageID #: 1
Case: 1:17-cv-02403 Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/15/17 1 of 12. PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ETi SOLID STATE LIGHTING, INC., ) CASE NO. 1:17-cv-2403
Case 4:15-cv Document 1 Filed 03/30/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1
Case 4:15-cv-00224 Document 1 Filed 03/30/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION AUTO LIGHTHOUSE PLUS, LLC, CIVIL ACTION NO. Plaintiff,
Case 1:15-cv RWS Document 1 Filed 05/30/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
Case 1:15-cv-01157-RWS Document 1 Filed 05/30/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION EMMANUEL C. GONZALEZ, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 2:14-cv-651
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
Case 2:13-cv-01106-UNAS-AKK Document 1 Filed 06/12/13 Page 1 of 152 FILED 2013 Jun-12 PM 02:40 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
Case3:12-cv VC Document21 Filed06/09/14 Page1 of 12
Case:-cv-0-VC Document Filed0/0/ Page of QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP David Eiseman (Bar No. ) davideiseman@quinnemanuel.com Carl G. Anderson (Bar No. ) carlanderson@quinnemanuel.com 0 California
Case: 5:09-cv SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/14/09 1 of 5. PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
Case: 5:09-cv-01604-SL Doc #: 1 Filed: 07/14/09 1 of 5. PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO HORTON ARCHERY, LLC Plaintiff, Case No. Judge v. AMERICAN HUNTING
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-00 Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Page ID #: 0 Randall J. Sunshine (SBN ) rsunshine@linerlaw.com Ryan E. Hatch (SBN ) rhatch@linerlaw.com Jason L. Haas (SBN 0) jhaas@linerlaw.com LINER LLP 00 Glendon
Case 6:18-cv Document 1 Filed 01/31/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1
Case 6:18-cv-00036 Document 1 Filed 01/31/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION SPIDER SEARCH ANALYTICS LLC Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION
Case 2:14-cv JRG-RSP Document 9 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 227
Case 2:14-cv-00799-JRG-RSP Document 9 Filed 08/08/14 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 227 ECLIPSE IP LLC, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Plaintiff, v. LUXI
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-00 Document Filed 0// Page of 0 KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP Paul F. Brinkman, P.C. (pro hac vice to be filed Edward C. Donovan, P.C. (pro hac vice to be filed F. Christopher Mizzo, P.C. (pro hac vice
Case: 2:14-cv EAS-NMK Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/14/14 Page: 1 of 7 PAGEID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 2:14-cv-00164-EAS-NMK Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/14/14 Page: 1 of 7 PAGEID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION VICTORIA'S SECRET STORES BRAND MANAGEMENT, INC., Four
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 1:11-cv-02037-UA Document 13 Filed 06/01/11 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) PURDUE PHARMA L.P., ) THE P.F. LABORATORIES, INC., ) PURDUE PHARMACEUTICALS
Case: 5:09-cv DDD Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/04/09 1 of 5. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 5:09-cv-01274-DDD Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/04/09 1 of 5. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION PDS ELECTRONICS, INC. d/b/a DX Engineering CASE NO.: 5:09 cv
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
ALTAIR ENGINEERING, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION Plaintiff, vs. Case No. Hon. LEDS AMERICA, INC. JURY TRIAL Defendant. / Thomas N. Young (P22656) Christopher
Case 2:13-cv JRG-RSP Document 12 Filed 07/10/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 104
Case 2:13-cv-00014-JRG-RSP Document 12 Filed 07/10/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 104 PERSONAL AUDIO, LLC IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION v. Plaintiff,
Case 1:13-cv GMS Document 23 Filed 03/12/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 117 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:13-cv-01883-GMS Document 23 Filed 03/12/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 117 MESSAGE NOTIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES LLC, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Plaintiff, C.A. No. 13-1883-GMS
PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT. Plaintiff Newthink, LLC ( Plaintiff ), by and through its undersigned counsel, files this
1 PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT Plaintiff Newthink, LLC ( Plaintiff ), by and through its undersigned counsel, files this Original Complaint against Defendant Viewsonic Corporation ( Defendant or Viewsonic
Case 1:13-cv SS Document 1 Filed 09/11/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION
Case 1:13-cv-00800-SS Document 1 Filed 09/11/13 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION CROSSROADS SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Case No. 3:13-cv N
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION EMPLOYMENT LAW COMPLIANCE, INC., Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 3:13-cv-04197-N EMPOWER SOFTWARE SOFTWARE Jury Trial Demanded
Case 4:14-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/08/14 Page 1 of 6
Case 4:14-cv-02578 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/08/14 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION BELFER COSMETICS, LLC Plaintiff, vs. Case No.
Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/15/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1
Case 4:16-cv-00876 Document 1 Filed 11/15/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION WILLIAM R. RASSMAN, Plaintiff, v. NEOGRAFT SOLUTIONS,
case 3:14-cv TLS-CAN document 1 filed 03/21/14 page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
case 3:14-cv-00575-TLS-CAN document 1 filed 03/21/14 page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA RICHARD GRAMM and HEADSIGHT, INC., v. DEERE AND COMPANY, Plaintiffs, Defendant.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY DIVISION ALPHAPOINTE, A Missouri not-for-profit corporation, v. Plaintiff, COMPOSITE RESOURCES, INC., Defendant. Case No. 4:17-CV-
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:11-cv ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION Case No: 5:11-cv-00296 VEOLIA WATER SOLUTIONS & TECHNOLOGIES SUPPORT, v. Plaintiff, SIEMENS INDUSTRY, INC.,
Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 01/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1
Case 6:14-cv-00032-JDL Document 1 Filed 01/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION PROPERTY DISCLOSURE TECHNOLOGIES LLC, v. Plaintiff,
Case 1:17-cv RDB Document 1 Filed 11/01/17 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Case 1:17-cv-03223-RDB Document 1 Filed 11/01/17 Page 1 of 6 UNDER ARMOUR, INC. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND v. BATTLE FASHIONS, INC. and KELSEY BATTLE, Case
Case 6:17-cv Document 1 Filed 04/05/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1
Case 6:17-cv-00203 Document 1 Filed 04/05/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION FALL LINE PATENTS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. CINEMARK
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION TABLETOP MEDIA, LLC, Plaintiff, v. SENDSIG, LLC, Defendant. Civil Action No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1 2 7 8 9 10 11 12 DYKEMA GOSSETT LLP Allan Gabriel (SBN 777) agabriel@dykema.com S. Grand Avenue, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (21) 7-170 Facsimile: (21) 7-180 Aaron D. Charfoos (IL 27722,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Case 1:16-cv-04110-TWT Document 1 Filed 11/02/16 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA IRONBURG INVENTIONS LTD. a United Kingdom Limited Company, Plaintiff,
Case 1:17-cv SLR Document 1 Filed 01/23/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 117-cv-00064-SLR Document 1 Filed 01/23/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID # 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. and ATI TECHNOLOGIES ULC, Plaintiffs,
Case 6:15-cv Document 1 Filed 01/13/15 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION COMPLAINT
Case 6:15-cv-00042 Document 1 Filed 01/13/15 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ADAPTIX, INC., Plaintiff, v. ERICSSON, INC., TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET
Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:16-cv-00237-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC, Plaintiff, v. MAIA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Defendant.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/24/ :27 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/24/2015 EXHIBIT C
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/24/2015 06:27 PM INDEX NO. 650458/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/24/2015 EXHIBIT C Case 1:14-cv-09012-DLC Document 2 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 14 Case 1:14-cv-09012-DLC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Archer Mobility Products, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. Penco Medical, Inc., DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Defendant. ARCHER MOBILITY PRODUCTS, LLC
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION RIDDELL, INC., v. Plaintiff, RAWLINGS SPORTING GOODS COMPANY, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No.: Jury Trial Demanded
Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 24 PageID #: 1
Case 2:17-cv-00290 Document 1 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 24 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION TRANSTEX LLC, and TRANSTEX COMPOSITES INC.
Case 4:15-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/20/15 Page 1 of 7
Case 4:15-cv-01366 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 05/20/15 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION AIR LIQUIDE LARGE INDUSTRIES U.S. LP v. Plaintiff,
Case: 1:11-cv DAP Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/19/11 1 of 9. PageID #: 1
Case: 1:11-cv-00123-DAP Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/19/11 1 of 9. PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION MT INDUSTRIES, INC., Plaintiff, -vs- ALLURE INSTITUTE,
Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1
Case 2:16-cv-00436 Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MARINER IC INC., v. Plaintiff, TOSHIBA CORPORATION,
Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 12/08/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:16-cv-01159-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/08/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE BLACKBIRD TECH LLC d/b/a BLACKBIRD TECHNOLOGIES, v. Plaintiff,
Case 1:17-cv RGS Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 1:17-cv-11285-RGS Document 1 Filed 07/12/17 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS SPIDER SEARCH ANALYTICS LLC Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. TRIAL BY JURY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ILIFE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. NINTENDO OF AMERICA, INC., Defendant. Civil Action No. 3:13-cv-4987 Jury Trial Demanded PLAINTIFF
Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:16-cv-00208-UNA Document 1 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE SMART METER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff C.A. NO. v. JURY TRIAL
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION T-REX PROPERTY AB, Plaintiff, v. CBS Corporation, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL
Case 1:18-cv YK Document 1 Filed 06/07/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 1:18-cv-01161-YK Document 1 Filed 06/07/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TECHNICAL LED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, LLC., Plaintiff, Civil Action
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
Case 3:15-cv-01054-RNC Document 21 Filed 09/09/15 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT PLASMA AIR INTERNATIONAL, INC., : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No: 3:15-cv-01054
Case 1:15-cv KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/20/2015 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:15-cv-20728-KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/20/2015 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION Case No. AIMETIS CORP. Plaintiff,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Case 5:07-cv-00156-DF-CMC Document 1-1 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION ESN, LLC, v. Plaintiff, CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.,