• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
240 results

EndyMed Medical Ltd. v. Serendia, LLC

Docket IPR2024-00844, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Aug. 1, 2024)
Carl DeFranco, Sheridan Snedden, Tina Hulse, presiding
Case TypeInter Partes Review
Patent
9320536
Patent Owner Serendia, LLC
Petitioner EndyMed Medical Ltd.
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Synkloud Technologies, LLC et al v. Sung Hwan E&B Co., Ltd.

Docket 6:21-cv-00811, Texas Western District Court (Aug. 6, 2021)
Judge Alan D Albright, presiding
Patent
DivisionWaco
FlagsPATENT
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Patent
10058379; 10869812; 9320536; 9480836
9320536
9480836
Plaintiff Synkloud Technologies, LLC
Plaintiff Serendia, LLC
Defendant Sung Hwan E&B Co., Ltd.
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Serendia LLC v. Aesthetics Biomedical Incorporated

Docket 2:22-cv-00015, Arizona District Court (Jan. 4, 2022)
Judge Douglas L Rayes, presiding
Patent
DivisionPhoenix
FlagsCLOSED, STD
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Patent
10058379; 10869812; 9320536; 9480836
9320536
9480836
Plaintiff SynKloud Technologies LLC
Plaintiff Serendia LLC
Defendant Aesthetics Biomedical Incorporated
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Cartessa Aesthetics, LLC v. Serendia, LLC

Docket IPR2022-00378, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Dec. 28, 2021)
Carl DeFranco, Sheridan Snedden, Tina Hulse, presiding
Case TypeInter Partes Review
Patent
9320536
Patent Owner Serendia, LLC
Petitioner Cartessa Aesthetics, LLC
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

No. 64 ORDER that pursuant to the parties' stipulation 63 , this matter is dismissed with prejudice, ...

Document SynKloud Technologies LLC et al v. Aesthetics Biomedical Incorporated, 2:22-cv-00015, No. 64 (D.Ariz. Nov. 21, 2023)
Aesthetics Biomedical Incorporated,
The Court having reviewed the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Dismissal (Doc. 63), and good cause appearing; IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, this matter is dismissed with prejudice, each party to bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees.
Dated this 20th day of November, 2023.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 61 ORDER granting 60 Unopposed Motion for a Mandatory Stay

Document Serendia LLC v. Aesthetics Biomedical Incorporated, 2:22-cv-00015, No. 61 (D.Ariz. Apr. 7, 2023)
Motion to StayGranted
Aesthetics Biomedical Incorporated,
The Court having reviewed Defendant Aesthetics Biomedical, Inc.’s Unopposed Motion for a Mandatory Stay Under 28 U.S.C. § 1659 (Doc. 60), and good cause appearing; IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s unopposed motion is GRANTED.
This case is hereby STAYED pending the resolution of International Trade Commission (“IFC”) Investigation No. 337-TA-1356, including all appeals.
The parties shall submit a joint status update on the IFC investigation every six months beginning October 7, 2023.
Dated this 7th day of April, 2023.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

14 Institution Decision Joined: Institution Decision Joined

Document IPR2024-00844, No. 14 Institution Decision Joined - Institution Decision Joined (P.T.A.B. Jan. 10, 2025)
However, as noted above, another entity, Jeisys Medical Inc. (“Jeisys”), filed an earlier petition on which we granted institution of inter partes review.
The ’774 patent is also the subject of a proceeding before the International Trade Commission, filed March 1, 2023, and captioned Certain Dermatological Treatment Devices and Components Thereof, No. 337-TA- 1356 (“the ITC Investigation”).
The ’774 patent is also the subject of several federal district court actions, some of which are stayed pending the outcome of the ITC proceeding and some of which have been dismissed— • Serendia, LLC v. Cutera, Inc., No. 1:23-cv-00222 (D.
Serendia also argues that joinder should be denied due to duplicative efforts with the parallel Delaware litigation, which involves the same parties and patent as here.
Thus, we will not discretionarily deny the petition or joinder on the basis of the parallel Delaware litigation.6 Also, to the extent Serendia contends EndyMed should not be permitted to join and continue an IPR that would otherwise be terminated due to Serendia’s settlement with Jeisys, we disagree for several reasons.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 59

Document SynKloud Technologies LLC et al v. Aesthetics Biomedical Incorporated, 2:22-cv-00015, No. 59 (D.Ariz. Mar. 27, 2023)

cite Cite Document
Analyze
1 2 3 4 5 ... 15 16 17 >>