IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT
|
|
|
- Gladys Campbell
- 9 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION GEVO, INC., v. Plaintiff, BUTAMAX(TM ADVANCED BIOFUELS LLC, E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND CO., BP p.l.c. d/b/a BP CORPORATION NORTH AMERICA INC., and BP BIOFUELS NORTH AMERICA LLC, Defendants. C.A. No. 2:12-cv-417 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff Gevo, Inc. ( Gevo, by its attorneys, for its Complaint against Defendants Butamax (TM Advanced Biofuels LLC s ( Butamax, E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co. ( DuPont, BP p.l.c. ( BP, BP Corporation North America Inc. ( BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America LLC ( BP Biofuels North America, alleges as follows: THE PARTIES 1. Gevo is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Englewood, Colorado. 2. Butamax is a limited liability corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Wilmington, Delaware. Butamax is jointly owned by DuPont and BP Biofuels North America, an indirect subsidiary of BP. 3. DuPont is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business in Wilmington, Delaware. 4. On information and belief, DuPont has multiple facilities located in this district
2 including facilities at 5470 North Twin City Highway, Nederland, TX and on Farm Road 1006, Orange, Texas BP is a public limited corporation incorporated under the laws of England and Wales, and is doing business in the United States through various subsidiaries including BP Corp North America, an Indiana corporation. 6. On information and belief, BP maintains its North American headquarters at 501 Westlake Park Blvd., Houston, Texas On information and belief, BP Corp North America has a principal place of business at 501 Westlake Park Blvd., Houston, Texas On information and belief, BP or BP Corp North America, has a facility located at 2800 Stanolind St., Longview, Texas, BP Biofuels North America is a limited liability corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 501 Westlake Park Blvd., Houston, Texas On information and belief, BP Biofuels North America has a Biofuels facility in Jennings, Louisiana, which is in close proximity to this district. 11. On information and belief, BP s agents, BP Corp North America and BP Biofuels North America do business in Texas. On information and belief, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America are both wholly-owned subsidiaries of BP. BP controls both BP Corp North America and BP Biofuels North America, among other subsidiaries. On information and belief, BP s Commercial and Financial Analysts and the NAGP arm of Integrated Supply and Trading are concentrated in Texas. 12. On information and belief, Butamax was formed in July 2009 for the purpose of - 2 -
3 commercializing technology that BP Biofuels North America and DuPont have been jointly developing since On information and belief, individuals employed by DuPont engage in research and development activities related to the subject matter of this action. 14. On information and belief, individuals employed by BP Biofuels North America engage in research and development activities related to the subject matter of this action. 15. On information and belief, DuPont directs Butamax to engage in research and development activities related to the subject matter of this action, and controls the manner in which these activities are performed. 16. On information and belief, BP, through its subsidiaries BP Corp North America and BP Biofuels North America, directs Butamax to engage in research and development activities related to the subject matter of this action and controls the manner in which these activities are performed. 17. On information and belief, BP Corp North America, through its subsidiary BP Biofuels North America, directs Butamax to engage in research and development activities related to the subject matter of this action and controls the manner in which these activities are performed. 18. On information and belief, BP Biofuels North America directs Butamax to engage in research and development activities related to the subject matter of this action, and controls the manner in which these activities are performed. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 19. This action arises under the Declaratory Judgment Act and the patent laws of the United States, including Title 35, United States Code. This court has jurisdiction over the - 3 -
4 subject matter of this action under 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1338(a, 2201, and On information and belief, this court has personal jurisdiction over DuPont because DuPont has multiple facilities located in this district, and it has availed itself of the benefits and protections of this state. DuPont maintains continuous and systematic contacts with the forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over DuPont would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 21. On information and belief, this Court also has personal jurisdiction over BP under agency and alter ego principles, and it has availed itself of the benefits and protections of this state. Through its subsidiaries, BP maintains continuous and systematic contacts with the forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over BP would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 22. On information and belief, this court has personal jurisdiction over BP Corp North America because its headquarters are located in Houston, Texas, and it has availed itself of the benefits and protections of this state. BP Corp North America maintains continuous and systematic contacts with the forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over BP would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 23. On information and belief, this court has personal jurisdiction over BP Biofuels North America because its principal place of business is located in Houston, Texas, and it has availed itself of the benefits and protections of this state. BP Biofuels North America maintains continuous and systematic contacts with the forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over BP Biofuels North America would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 24. On information and belief, this court has personal jurisdiction over Butamax because Butamax is jointly owned by DuPont and BP Biofuels North America, a subsidiary of - 4 -
5 BP and/or BP Corp North America. Butamax, through its parent corporations, maintains continuous and systematic contacts with the forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over DuPont would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. 25. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b and 1400(b. THE PATENT-IN-SUIT 26. On July 31, 2012, United States Patent No. 8,232,089 ( the 089 Patent entitled Cytosolic Isobutanol Pathway Localization for the Production of Isobutanol issued to Jun Urano, Catherine Asleson Dundon, Peter Meinhold, Reid M. Renny Feldman, Aristos Aristidou, Andrew Hawkins, Thomas Buelter, Matthew Peters, Doug Lies, Stephanie Porter-Scheinman, Ruth Berry, and Ishmeet Kalra. 1 The entire right, title, and interest to the 089 Patent has been assigned to Gevo. Gevo is the owner and possessor of all rights pertaining to the 089 Patent. 27. On March 31, 2011, United States Patent Publication No. US 2011/ ( the 733 Publication was published. The application of the 733 Publication issued as the 089 Patent, and the 733 Publication includes claims that are identical or substantially identical to claims of the 089 Patent. 28. On information and belief, Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America had knowledge of the 733 Publication prior to the issuance of the 089 Patent. 29. The 089 Patent and the 733 Publication disclose and claim, among other things, recombinant yeast microorganisms comprising a metabolically engineered isobutanol pathway containing an exogenously encoded dihydroxy acid dehydratase ( DHAD with at least 90% identity to the motif of disclosed SEQ ID NO: 27, and engineered to inactivate one or more 1 The 089 Patent issued on July 31, 2012 at 12:00 a.m. EDT, as shown on the July 11, 2012 Issue Notification attached as Exhibit 1, however, a paper copy of the patent will not be available until August 2, We will file a hard copy of the patent as soon as it becomes available
6 endogenous pyruvate decarboxylase ( PDC genes and a method for producing the microorganism. 30. On information and belief, Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America disclose recombinant yeast strains expressing a metabolically engineered isobutanol pathway with DHAD with at least 90% identity to the motif of SEQ ID NO: 27, and engineered to inactivate one or more endogenous PDC genes. Complaint. COUNT I Infringement of the 089 Patent Against Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America 31. Gevo incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-30 of this 32. On information and belief, Butamax has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. On information and belief, Butamax s infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271 will continue unless Butamax s conduct is enjoined. 33. On information and belief, DuPont has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. On information and belief, DuPont s infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271 will continue unless DuPont s conduct is - 6 -
7 enjoined. 34. On information and belief, BP has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. On information and belief, BP s infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271 will continue unless BP s conduct is enjoined. 35. On information and belief, BP Corp North America has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. On information and belief, BP s infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271 will continue unless BP s conduct is enjoined. 36. On information and belief, BP Biofuels North America has directly and/or infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. On information and belief, BP s infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 271 will continue unless BP s conduct is enjoined. 37. On information and belief, Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America s infringing activities have already occurred and will - 7 -
8 continue unless enjoined by this Court. Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America s infringement of the 089 Patent causes harm to Gevo. Thus, a real and substantial controversy exists between Gevo, on one hand, and Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America, on the other. 38. As a result of Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America s infringement of the 089 Patent, Gevo has suffered irreparable harm for which Gevo has no adequate remedy at law. COUNT II Infringement of Gevo s Provisional Rights in the 089 Patent Against Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America Complaint. 39. Gevo incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-38 of this 40. On information and belief, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 154(d, Butamax has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, Gevo s provisional patent rights in one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. 41. On information and belief, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 154(d, DuPont has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, Gevo s provisional patent rights in one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery
9 42. On information and belief, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 154(d, BP has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, Gevo s provisional patent rights in one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. 43. On information and belief, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 154(d, BP Corp North America has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, Gevo s provisional patent rights in one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. 44. On information and belief, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 154(d, BP Biofuels North America has directly and/or indirectly infringed, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, Gevo s provisional patent rights in one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent by performing and/or directing others to perform the methods described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. Gevo believes it will develop further evidence for this allegation after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery. 45. Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America s infringement of Gevo s provisional rights in the claims of the 089 Patent harmed Gevo. Thus, a real and substantial controversy exists between Gevo, on one hand, and Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America, on the other. 46. As a result of Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels - 9 -
10 North America s infringement of Gevo s provisional rights in the claims of the 089 Patent, Gevo is entitled to recover a reasonable royalty pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 154(d(1. Complaint. COUNT III Indirect Infringement of the 089 Patent Against Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America 47. Gevo incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-46 of this 48. On information and belief, Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America have actively and knowingly assisted with, participated in, contributed to, and/or directed others to perform the method described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. On information and belief, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America were aware of the 089 Patent and/or the 733 Publication when they engaged in these knowing and purposeful activities referred to above. 49. Under 35 U.S.C. 271(b, Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America induced the infringement of the 089 Patent by actively and knowingly aiding and abetting others to perform the method described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. 50. Under 35 U.S.C. 154(d and 271(b, Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America have induced others to infringe Gevo s provisional rights in the claims of the 089 Patent by actively and knowingly aiding and abetting others to perform the method described in paragraph 29 without Gevo s authorization. 51. On information and belief, Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America have acted with knowledge of the 089 Patent and/or the 733 Publication and without a reasonable basis for a good faith belief that it would not be liable for
11 infringement of the 089 Patent. Thus, Butamax s, DuPont s, BP s, BP Corp North America s, and/or BP Biofuels North America s ongoing infringement is willful and deliberate, making this an exceptional case. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Gevo respectfully requests the following relief: a That judgment be entered declaring that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and/or BP Biofuels North America has/have infringed one or more claims of the 089 Patent, and Gevo s provisional rights in those claims, by manufacturing isobutanol through fermentation and extracting that isobutanol using methods described and claimed in the 089 Patent and/or by importing isobutanol that has been manufactured in that manner. b That judgment be entered declaring that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America have induced others to infringe one or more of the claims of the 089 Patent, and Gevo s provisional rights in those claims by, without Gevo s authorization, assisting, abetting, and encouraging others to engineer recombinant yeast described and claimed in the 089 Patent and/or to import isobutanol that has been manufactured in that manner, and that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America and/or BP Biofuels North America s inducement of others to infringe are acts of infringement of one or more claims of the 089 Patent. c That this Court adjudge and decree that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America have been and are currently infringing the 089 Patent. d That this Court adjudge and decree that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America infringed Gevo s provisional rights in the claims of the 089 Patent
12 e That this Court adjudge and decree that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America have been and are currently inducing others to infringe the 089 Patent. f That this Court adjudge and decree that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America have induced others to infringe Gevo s provisional rights in the claims of the 089 Patent. g That this Court enter an order that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America and its officers, agents, servants, employees, successors and assigns, and those persons acting in concert with them, be preliminarily and permanently enjoined from infringing the 089 Patent. h That this Court enter an order that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America and its officers, agents, servants, employees, successors and assigns, and those persons acting in concert with them, be preliminarily and permanently enjoined from inducing others to infringe the 089 Patent. i That this Court award damages to Gevo to compensate it for each of the unlawful actions set forth in the Complaint. j That this Court award interest on such damages to Gevo. k That this Court determine that Butamax, DuPont, BP, BP Corp North America, and BP Biofuels North America willfully infringed one or more claims of the 089 Patent. l That this Court determine that this patent infringement case is exceptional and award Gevo its expenses including its attorneys fees incurred in this action pursuant to 35 U.S.C m That interests, costs, and expenses be awarded in favor of Gevo
13 n That this Court order such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Gevo respectfully requests a trial by jury on all issues triable thereby. Respectfully submitted, /s/ T. John Ward, Jr. T. John Ward, Jr. State Bar No [email protected] Claire Abernathy Henry Texas State Bar No [email protected] Ward & Smith Law Firm 1127 Judson Road, Suite 220 Longview, Texas ( (telephone ( (facsimile Of Counsel: Attorneys for Plaintiff Gevo, Inc. Gerald J. Flattmann Preston K. Ratliff II Joseph M. O Malley, Jr. Anthony Michael PAUL HASTINGS LLP Park Avenue Tower 75 E. 55th Street New York, NY ( Jason T. Christiansen PAUL HASTINGS LLP 1000 Louisiana Street 54th Floor Houston, TX ( July 30,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION ACQIS LLC, Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP., Case No. 6:11-CV-546 Jury Trial Demanded
Case 1:12-cv-00070-SLR Document 8 Filed 03/09/12 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 216 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:12-cv-00070-SLR Document 8 Filed 03/09/12 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 216 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE GEVO, INC., v. Plaintiff, BUTAMAX(TM ADVANCED BIOFUELS LLC, and
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
Case 6:10-cv-00557 Document 1 Filed 10/21/10 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION TRANSDATA, INC., Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. v. 6:10-cv-557
Case 2:07-cv-00447-LED Document 1-1 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 1 of 5
Case 2:07-cv-00447-LED Document 1-1 Filed 10/09/2007 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION IP INNOVATION L.L.C. AND TECHNOLOGY LICENSING CORPORATION,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE DERMAFOCUS LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, v. Plaintiff, ULTHERA, INC., a Delaware corporation. Civil Action No: DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Defendant.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
DR. LAKSHMI ARUNACHALAM, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Plaintiff, Civil Action No: v. VICTORIA S SECRET DIRECT BRAND MANAGEMENT, LLC, JURY TRIAL
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA LYNCHBURG (CHARLOTTESVILLE) DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No. v.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA LYNCHBURG (CHARLOTTESVILLE) DIVISION UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA PATENT FOUNDATION Plaintiff, Case No. v. HAMILTON COMPANY AND HAMILTON
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY DEFENDANT S ANSWER
Case 1:14-cv-05919-JEI-KMW Document 19 Filed 02/13/15 Page 1 of 11 PageID: 84 Frank L. Corrado, Esquire Attorney ID No. 022221983 BARRY, CORRADO & GRASSI, PC 2700 Pacific Avenue Wildwood, NJ 08260 (609)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
1 1 1 1 1 0 1 Luke L. Dauchot (SBN Nimalka R. Wickramasekera (SBN Benjamin A. Herbert (SBN South Hope Street Los Angeles, California 001 Telephone: (1 0-00 Facsimile: (1 0-00 Attorneys for Plaintiff, v.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE MOBILE TRANSFORMATION LLC, Plaintiff, v. Civil Case No. A&E TELEVISION NETWORKS, LLC JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. COMPLAINT Plaintiff
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JPM NETWORKS, LLC, ) d/b/a KWIKBOOST ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. ) 3:14-cv-1507 JCM FIRST VENTURE, LLC )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. v. JURY DEMANDED COMPLAINT THE PARTIES
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION PRINTERON INC., Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:13-CV-3025 v. JURY DEMANDED BREEZYPRINT CORPORATION and U.S. HOSPITALITY
Case 1:15-cv-01148 Document 1 Filed 06/02/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-01148 Document 1 Filed 06/02/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO D THREE ENTERPRISES, LLC, v. Plaintiff, RILLITO RIVER SOLAR LLC d/b/a ECOFASTEN
Case 6:12-cv-00799 Document 1 Filed 10/22/12 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1
Case 6:12-cv-00799 Document 1 Filed 10/22/12 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION INVENSYS SYSTEMS, INC. Plaintiff, C.A. No.: v.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT THE PARTIES
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE AEROSCOUT, LTD. and AEROSCOUT, INC., v. CENTRAK INC., Plaintiffs, Defendant. C.A. No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT Plaintiffs AeroScout,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION RPOST HOLDINGS, INC., RPOST COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED, and RMAIL LIMITED, CIVIL ACTION NO. Plaintiffs, v. ADOBE SYSTEMS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
Case 2:12-cv-00604-MHS-CMC Document 1 Filed 09/18/12 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 1 CAPITAL SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC., IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Plaintiff,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION ZIPIT WIRELESS INC., Plaintiff, v. BLACKBERRY LIMITED F/K/A RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED and BLACKBERRY CORPORATION f/k/a
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD., MITSUBISHI HEAVY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MICROSOFT CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation v. Plaintiff, SALESFORCE.COM, INC., a Delaware Corporation Defendants. UNITED STATES DISTRICT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION
Peter E. Heuser, OSB # 811281 Email [email protected] Devon Zastrow Newman, OSB #014627 Email [email protected] Telephone: 503.222.9981 Facsimile: 503.796.2900 Sean G. Gallagher, pro hac vice pending
IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. v. ) C.A. No.
IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE M2M SOLUTIONS LLC, ) a Delaware limited liability company, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. ) ENFORA, INC., a Delaware corporation, ) JURY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
BLACK & HAMILL LLP Bradford J. Black (SBN 1) [email protected] Andrew G. Hamill (SBN 1) [email protected] Embarcadero Street, Suite 00 San Francisco, California 1 Telephone: --0 Facsimile: -- DESMARAIS
Case 2:09-cv-00289-TJW Document 1 Filed 09/23/2009 Page 1 of 8
Case 2:09-cv-00289-TJW Document 1 Filed 09/23/2009 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION SimpleAir, Inc., a Texas corporation, Plaintiff, CASE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION. v. Case No. COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION ALLURE ENERGY, INC., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. Case No. NEST LABS, INC., a Delaware corporation, GREEN
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE GENETIC TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, an Australian corporation, Plaintiff, v. LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA HOLDINGS, a Delaware corporation,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION FUTUREVISION.COM, LLC, Plaintiff, v. TIME WARNER CABLE, INC., TIME WARNER CABLE, LLC, CEQUEL COMMUNICATIONS, LLC DBA
Case 1:14-cv-01362-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/31/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:14-cv-01362-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/31/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ENDEAVOR MESHTECH, INC., Plaintiff, v. SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA, INC., Civil
Broadband Graphics - infringement of Patent Law and Procedure
0 Devon Zastrow Newman (State Bar # ) Johnathan E. Mansfield (State Bar # ) SCHWABE, WILLIAMSON & WYATT SW TH Avenue, Suite 00 Phone: (0) - Fax: (0) -00 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]
Case 6:15-cv-00059 Document 1 Filed 01/20/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1
Case 6:15-cv-00059 Document 1 Filed 01/20/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC, Plaintiff, v. Case
Case 1:14-cv-01078-UNA Document 1 Filed 08/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:14-cv-01078-UNA Document 1 Filed 08/21/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, v. Plaintiff, SUNEDISON,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION UNILOC USA, INC. and UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A, v. Plaintiffs, RACKSPACE HOSTING, INC. and RACKSPACE US, INC., Defendants.
Case 2:15-cv-01266-RWS Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 1
Case 2:15-cv-01266-RWS Document 1 Filed 07/10/15 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION AUTOMATION MIDDLEWARE SOLUTIONS, INC.,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CA No. COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Case 1:99-mc-09999 Document 92 Filed 03/02/10 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE APPLE INC., vs. Plaintiff, High Tech Computer Corp., a/k/a HTC Corp., HTC (B.V.I.
Case5:15-cv-02579-NC Document1 Filed06/10/15 Page1 of 8
Case:-cv-0-NC Document Filed0// Page of KALPANA SRINIVASAN (0) [email protected] OLEG ELKHUNOVICH () [email protected] SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. 0 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 0 Los
Case 2:14-cv-01131-AJS Document 1 Filed 08/22/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 2:14-cv-01131-AJS Document 1 Filed 08/22/14 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC and INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC v.
Case 6:15-cv-00145-JRG-KNM Document 1 Filed 02/25/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1
Case 6:15-cv-00145-JRG-KNM Document 1 Filed 02/25/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION SMARTFLASH LLC, and SMARTFLASH TECHNOLOGIES
Case 4:11-cv-02191 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 06/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Case 4:11-cv-02191 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 06/10/11 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SUPPLY CHAIN CONNECT, LLC, v. Plaintiff, 1. AFTON CHEMICAL CORPORATION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE QAXAZ LLC, Plaintiff, v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC; FORD MOTOR COMPANY; GENERAL MOTORS COMPANY; MERCEDES-BENZ USA, LLC; MICROSOFT CORPORATION;
GOODIX TECHNOLOGY INC., SHENZHEN HUIDING TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. A/K/A SHENZHEN GOODIX TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD., and
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP Cono A. Carrano (pro hac vice to be filed) Email: [email protected] David C. Vondle (Bar
Case 1:10-cv-00168-JBS -KMW Document 1 Filed 01/12/10 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 1:10-cv-00168-JBS -KMW Document 1 Filed 01/12/10 Page 1 of 21 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY SMART VENT INC., : : Plaintiff, : CIVIL ACTION NO.: : : : USA FLOODAIR VENTS,
Case 6:16-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1
Case 6:16-cv-00081 Document 1 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION Intellectual Ventures II LLC, Plaintiff, v. Case
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE imtx STRATEGIC, LLC, Plaintiff, v. APPLE INC., Civil Action No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant. Plaintiff imtx Strategic, LLC ( Plaintiff or imtx
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION BRITE SMART CORP. Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE INC. Defendant. Civ. Action No. 2:14-cv-760 JURY DEMANDED ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. AND PHILIPS SOLID-STATE LIGHTING SOLUTIONS, INC. v. Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-cv-10549 DEMAND FOR
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ARBITRON INC., v. Plaintiff, SAGA COMMUNICATIONS, INC. and LAKEFRONT COMMUNICATIONS LLC, Defendants. C.A. No. COMPLAINT Plaintiff, Arbitron
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION SMILEBOND SYSTEMS LLC, a Michigan Limited Liability Company, v. Plaintiff, GC AMERICA INC. an Illinois Corporation,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Plaintiff Endeavor MeshTech, Inc. ( Plaintiff or Endeavor ), by and through its
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ENDEAVOR MESHTECH, INC., Plaintiff, v. ACLARA TECHNOLOGIES LLC, Civil Action No. ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Case 1:14-cv-00266-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:14-cv-00266-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/26/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE RICHARD L. PONZIANI, v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.: FORD MOTOR
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COMMSCOPE, INC. OF NORTH CAROLINA and ADC TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., v. Plaintiffs, CORNING OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS LTD., Defendant.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION C-CATION TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, v. Plaintiff, Case No. 2:14-cv-59 TIME WARNER CABLE INC., TIME WARNER CABLE ENTERPRISES LLC, TIME WARNER
Case 1:10-cv-10494-WGY Document 1 Filed 03/23/10 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Case 1:10-cv-10494-WGY Document 1 Filed 03/23/10 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. AND PHILIPS SOLID-STATE LIGHTING SOLUTIONS,
Case 1:14-cv-12193-WGY Document 1 Filed 05/16/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
Case 1:14-cv-12193-WGY Document 1 Filed 05/16/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS PRIVATE BUSINESS JETS, L.L.C. Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. PRVT, Inc. Defendant. COMPLAINT
Case 1:12-cv-00939-RPM Document 1 Filed 04/09/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:12-cv-00939-RPM Document 1 Filed 04/09/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO NEOMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. SPYDERLYNK, LLC.
Case 1:12-cv-01105-RBJ Document 1 Filed 04/26/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:12-cv-01105-RBJ Document 1 Filed 04/26/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. JERALD A. BOVINO, v. Plaintiff, APPLE, INC.,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
Andrew W. Stavros (8615) Austin B. Egan (13203) STAVROS LAW P.C. 11693 South 700 East, Suite 200 Draper, Utah 84020 Tel: (801) 758.7604 Fax: (801) 893.3573 Email: [email protected] [email protected]
Case 9:15-cv-80366-JIC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/19/2015 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case No.
Case 9:15-cv-80366-JIC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/19/2015 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ARRIVAL STAR, SA, and MELVINO TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, Case No.: v.
Case 3:15-cv-01953-MO Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 Page 1 of 8
Case 3:15-cv-01953-MO Document 1 Filed 10/16/15 Page 1 of 8 Brenna K. Legaard, OSB #001658 Email: [email protected] SCHWABE, WILLIAMSON & WYATT, P.C. 1211 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 1900 Portland, OR 97204
Case4:15-cv-04219-DMR Document1 Filed09/16/15 Page1 of 11
Case:-cv-0-DMR Document Filed0// Page of MICHAEL G. RHODES () ([email protected]) California Street, th Floor San Francisco, CA Telephone: Facsimile: BRENDAN J. HUGHES (pro hac vice to be filed) ([email protected])
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION TELE-CONS, INC and MICHAEL MOISIN, Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. JURY TRIAL DEMAND GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; KONINKLIJKE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE. Case No.
1 1 1 1 1 1 WORDLOGIC CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation and 01 BRITISH COLUMBIA LTD., a Canadian corporation, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE Plaintiffs, TOUCHTYPE
Case: 3:14-cv-00062-bbc Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
Case: 3:14-cv-00062-bbc Document #: 1 Filed: 01/31/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION, v. APPLE INC., Plaintiff, Case
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION WAYNE WILLIAMS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiff, PROTECT SECURITY, LLC. Defendant.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION AMERICAS, INC., COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION JUXTACOMM- TEXAS SOFTWARE, LLC v. PLAINTIFF, (1) AXWAY, INC., (2) BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC, (3) DATAFLUX CORPORATION, (4)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
Case 1:99-mc-09999 Document 207 Filed 05/13/11 Page 1 of 27 PageID #: 18431 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. and MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS, INC., v. Plaintiffs,
Case 1:15-cv-00183-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/24/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:15-cv-00183-UNA Document 1 Filed 02/24/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE SUPERIOR OIL COMPANY, INC., a Delaware corporation, v. Plaintiff,
Case 2:12-cv-01941-GMN-GWF Document 1 Filed 11/09/12 Page 1 of 7
Case :-cv-0-gmn-gwf Document Filed /0/ Page of GORDON SILVER MOLLY M. REZAC, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. Email: [email protected] JUSTIN J. BUSTOS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 0 Email: [email protected] Suite
Case 1:13-cv-00890-RGA Document 1 Filed 05/20/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:13-cv-00890-RGA Document 1 Filed 05/20/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ALARM.COM INCORPORATED, Plaintiff, v. TELULAR CORPORATION, Defendant.
Case 3:14-cv-01824-M Document 1 Filed 05/19/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID 1
Case 3:14-cv-01824-M Document 1 Filed 05/19/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION BEST LITTLE PROMOHOUSE IN TEXAS LLC, Plaintiffs,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CANON INC. and CANON U.S.A., INC., Defendants. COMPLAINT
CASE 0:12-cv-02397-RHK-TNL Document 1 Filed 09/14/12 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
CASE 0:12-cv-02397-RHK-TNL Document 1 Filed 09/14/12 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA QUALITY BICYCLE PRODUCTS, INC. v. Plaintiff, BIKEBARON, LLC SINCLAIR IMPORTS, LLC and
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. Plaintiffs, C. A. NO. VS.
Case 4:12-cv-02469 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 08/17/12 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA;
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION
Case 1:14-cv-01516-WSD Document 1 Filed 05/19/14 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION CAPITAL SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. v. Plaintiff, NCR
Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document261 Filed08/31/12 Page1 of 15. Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant Apple Inc.
Case:-cv-000-LHK Document Filed0// Page of JOSH A. KREVITT (CA SBN ) [email protected] H. MARK LYON (CA SBN ) [email protected] GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 0- Telephone:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-000-jah -CAB Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Joshua B. Swigart, Esq. (SBN: ) [email protected] Robert L. Hyde, Esq. (SBN: ) [email protected] Hyde & Swigart Camino Del Rio South,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION 070CT~;Q PH12:02 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ?/lot II 6,b III lis'
SOLICITOR i it. 1_ L; NOV - 1 2007 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT U.S. PATENT & TRADEMARK OFFICE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION 070CT~;Q PH12:02 LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,
JUDGE RAMOS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK COMPLAINT
1 Filed 09/26/14 Page 1 of 11 Marc A Fenster Email [email protected] Jeffrey Liao Email: [email protected] Andrew D. Weiss Email: [email protected] RUSS AUGUST & KABAT 12424 Wilshire Boulevard Twelfth
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA
PHILIP M. BALLIF Nevada Bar # 2650 DURHAM, JONES & PINEGAR. P.C. 10785 W. Twain Avenue, Suite 200 Las Vegas, Nevada 89135 Telephone: (702 870-6060 Facsimile: (702 870-6090 Email: [email protected] JOHN
* Each Will Comply With LR IA 10 2 Within 45 days Attorneys for Plaintiff, Goldman, Sachs & Co.
Case :-cv-00-lrh -WGC Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Stanley W. Parry Esq. Nevada Bar No. Jon T. Pearson, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 0 BALLARD SPAHR LLP 00 North City Parkway, Suite 0 Las Vegas, NV 0 Telephone:
Case 1:11-cv-04545-AKH Document 1 Filed 07/01/11 Page 1 of 8 SPRINT UNITED MANAGEMENT COMPANY, Plaintiff, Defendant.
Case 1:11-cv-04545-AKH Document 1 Filed 07/01/11 Page 1 of 8 Marshall Bei] Kristina M. Allen McGIAREWOODS LLP 1345 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10105-0106 (212) 548-2100 Attorneys for Plainti
Case 2:15-cv-02235-SHL-dkv Document 1 Filed 04/09/15 Page 1 of 16 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
Case 2:15-cv-02235-SHL-dkv Document 1 Filed 04/09/15 Page 1 of 16 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE FIRST HORIZON NATIONAL ) CORPORATION and ) FIRST TENNESSEE
Case5:15-cv-00404-HRL Document1 Filed01/28/15 Page1 of 12
Case:-cv-000-HRL Document Filed0// Page of 0 ERIC DONEY, #0 [email protected] JULIE E. HOFER, # [email protected] ANDREW S. MACKAY, #0 [email protected] DONAHUE FITZGERALD LLP Harrison Street, th Floor
Case: 1:15-cv-00608 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/21/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1
Case: 1:15-cv-00608 Document #: 1 Filed: 01/21/15 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DEBRA WONG YANG United States Attorney GARY PLESSMAN Assistant United States Attorney Chief, Civil Fraud Section California State Bar No. 1 Room 1, Federal Building 00 North Los Angeles Street Los Angeles,
Case 2:16-cv-00928-APG-GWF Document 1 Filed 04/24/16 Page 1 of 12
Case :-cv-00-apg-gwf Document Filed 0// Page of CHARLES C. RAINEY, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. [email protected] RAINEY LEGAL GROUP, PLLC 0 W. Martin Avenue, Second Floor Las Vegas, Nevada +.0..0 (ph +... (fax
Case 3:15-cv-08128-MLC-LHG Document 1 Filed 11/17/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID: 1
Case 315-cv-08128-MLC-LHG Document 1 Filed 11/17/15 Page 1 of 7 PageID 1 William L. Mentlik Roy H. Wepner Stephen F. Roth Aaron S. Eckenthal LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG, KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK, LLP 600 South
4:14-cv-02261-PMD Date Filed 06/10/14 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 10
4:14-cv-02261-PMD Date Filed 06/10/14 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION RICHARD REYNOLDS, SHARON LINICK, LINDA NEELY,
Case: 1:14-cv-09680 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/03/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1
Case: 1:14-cv-09680 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/03/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION NEOCHLORIS, INC. v. Plaintiff, Case No.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE RELUME CORPORATION TRUST, and DENNY FOY, SHAWN GRADY and MARIE HOCHSTEIN, TRUSTEES, Civil Action No.: Plaintiffs, v. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Case 1:15-cv-02739-WYD-MEH Document 1 Filed 12/17/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-02739-WYD-MEH Document 1 Filed 12/17/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 11 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. CLEAR SKIES NEVADA, LLC, a Nevada Limited
