• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
225 results

ZIRVI v. ILLUMINA, INC. et al

Docket 2:23-cv-01997, New Jersey District Court (Apr. 8, 2023)
Judge Madeline Cox Arleo, presiding, Magistrate Judge Jessica S. Allen
Patent
DivisionNewark
FlagsAPPEAL, CLOSED
Cause15:1126 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Patent
... 7955794 ...
5002867500305950345065104791511486451302385132242514385351750825185243519430052022315216141523282952446365244813525447752987415302509531480953208145357590538602353875055399491540371154098185427930543572454459345455166547489554816295494810550398055081795514545552546455413115545522554553155545165571639557390755739095575849557883255958905602240561440256339725637684563960356440485656241566098856795245681702569089456959405705365571002957167855719028571902957337295744305579260757957145795716580099258043765834758584025658436695846710584671758467195849544585608358587325863708587421958769245888723588877958888195891636590048159225535935793594239159521745974164597679759940666013440601345660177386023540602560160278896040138605138060837636090558609649661106786124102618878362216036225060622991162516396291170630982263162296327410634641363554316372813639936564033206604902661048266186796620584677044168120056858394689074169138846931884703375470604317166431722673473614887455965745597175108417563576758242076118697612020767081077765317803537789962679018977914988
7955794
7960119800335480760638080380811036381506268150627820691782881038440407846086584812688486625849208585412078563246862895287416308795967888342488952688906626904579691632839279148928976693408349399795944126795355029537516
Plaintiff MONIB ZIRVI
Defendant ILLUMINA, INC.
Defendant AKIN GUMP STRAUSS ) HAUER & FELD LLP
...
cite Cite Docket

No. 146 LETTER ORDER: In light of the foregoing, the 10/16/24 Telephone Status Conference is canceled

Document ZIRVI v. ILLUMINA, INC. et al, 2:23-cv-01997, No. 146 (D.N.J. Oct. 9, 2024)
United States District Court MLK Jr. Federal Bldg.
Courthouse 50 Walnut Street Newark, NJ 07102 Re: Zirvi v. Illumina, Inc., et al. Dear Judges Arleo and Alien: My firm, along with Sidley Austin, represents Defendant Illumina, Inc. in the above- captioned matter.
I am writing to advise the Court that, after Illumina filed its letter yesterday.
The parties are currently finalizing execution of the written settlement agreement, and Illumina therefore no longer requires the assistance of the Court.
Accord^agly, we withdraw our request for the Court to reopen this case to address settlement issuer We thank Your Honors for your attention to this matter.
cite Cite Document

No. 139 ORDER denying 120 Motion for Reconsideration as to the Akin Defendants and the case is CLOSED

Document ZIRVI v. ILLUMINA, INC. et al, 2:23-cv-01997, No. 139 (D.N.J. Aug. 6, 2024)
Motion for ReconsiderationDenied
Dear Litigants: Before this Court is Plaintiff Monib Zirvi’s (“Zirvi”) Motion for Reconsideration (the “Motion”) of the Court’s Order, ECF No. 119 (the “April Order”), dismissing his Complaint with prejudice.
Following an in-person settlement conference with the Honorable Jessica S. Allen, Zirvi has withdrawn his Motion as to Defendants Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Rip Finst, Sean Boyle, Illumina, Inc., Latham & Watkins LLP, Roger Chin, and Douglas Lumish (the “Settling Defendants”).
His Motion, therefore, proceeds only as to Defendants Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP (“Akin”), Matthew A. Pearson (“Pearson”), and Angela Verrecchio (“Verrecchio”) (collectively, the “Akin Defendants”).
For the reasons stated below, Zirvi’s Motion is DENIED.1 To prevail on a motion for reconsideration, the movant must demonstrate “(1) an intervening change in the controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence that was not available when the court [issued its order]; or (3) the need to correct a clear error of law or fact or to prevent manifest injustice.” Max’s Seafood Café v. Quinteros, 176 F.3d 669, 677 (3d Cir. 1999).
As Plaintiff fails to state any new issues of fact and has not otherwise met the standard for reconsideration, his Motion must be denied.
cite Cite Document

No. 137

Document ZIRVI v. ILLUMINA, INC. et al, 2:23-cv-01997, No. 137 (D.N.J. Aug. 1, 2024)

cite Cite Document

No. 132

Document ZIRVI v. ILLUMINA, INC. et al, 2:23-cv-01997, No. 132 (D.N.J. Jul. 11, 2024)

cite Cite Document

No. 119

Document ZIRVI v. ILLUMINA, INC. et al, 2:23-cv-01997, No. 119 (D.N.J. Apr. 26, 2024)

cite Cite Document

No. 117

Document ZIRVI v. ILLUMINA, INC. et al, 2:23-cv-01997, No. 117 (D.N.J. Jan. 11, 2024)

cite Cite Document

No. 102

Document ZIRVI v. ILLUMINA, INC. et al, 2:23-cv-01997, No. 102 (D.N.J. Oct. 16, 2023)

cite Cite Document
1 2 3 4 5 ... 14 15 16 >>