Search court records - party Michael Chakansky, page 4

No. 21 ORDER granting 19 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File an Amended Complaint

Document Solo Brands, LLC v. Target Corporation, 2:22-cv-00115, No. 21 (E.D.Tex. Jul. 22, 2022)

Motion to File Amended ComplaintGranted

Before the Court is the Unopposed Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (the “Motion”) filed by Plaintiff Solo Brands, LLC (“Plaintiff”).

In the Motion, Plaintiff seeks leave to amend its Complaint to add infringement claims based on two newly issued patents.

Defendant Target Corporation (“Defendant”) does not oppose the Motion.

Having considered the Motion, and noting its unopposed nature, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED.

Accordingly, Plaintiff has leave to file an amended complaint.

Cite Document

Analyze

Search within this case
Analyze Judge
- Rodney Gilstrap
Analyze Party
- Solo Brands
- Target
Analyze Firm

25 Final Written Decision original: Final Written Decision original

Document IPR2020-01534, No. 25 Final Written Decision original - Final Written Decision original (P.T.A.B. May. 18, 2022)

Final Written Decision - Denied

A patent 11 The burden of showing something by a preponderance of the evidence requires the trier of fact to believe that the existence of a fact is more probable than its nonexistence before the trier of fact may find in favor of the party ...

Cite Document

Analyze

Search within this case
Analyze Judge
Analyze Party
- Aker Biomarine Antarctic As
- Rimfrost As
Analyze Firm
- Casimir Jones
- Hoffman & Baron

No. 99 ORDER denying without prejudice 78 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying without prejudice ...

Document Ever Victory Technology Limited v. SAS Group, Inc., 1:19-cv-00486, No. 99 (S.D.N.Y. May. 17, 2022)

J. PAUL OETKEN, District Judge: Defendant moved for summary judgment of non-infringement and filed its memorandum of law in support of its motion on February 7, 2022.

Plaintiff then cross- moved for summary judgment of patent infringement on February 18, 2022.

Lastly, both parties filed reply memoranda in support of their respective motions.

The Court therefore denies the parties’ motions without prejudice and directs them to confer on a briefing schedule that is consistent with the Court’s individual rules.

The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 78 and 85.

Cite Document

Analyze

Search within this case
Analyze Judge
- Timothy Reif
Analyze Party
- Ever Victory Technology
Analyze Firm
- Barclay Damon
- Bishop Diehl & Lee

No. 42 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT

Document Neurelis, Inc. v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., 21-1038, No. 42 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 20, 2021)

Howard T. Markey National Courts Building 717 Madison Place, NW, Washington, DC 20439 Courtroom 402 Counsel and designated attendees must check-in at the courtroom between 9:15 and 9:30 a.m. Each party must complete and return the Response to Notice of Oral Argument and Certification of Compliance with Revised Protocols for In-Person Argument by September 15, 2021.

Requests for any communications-related disability assistance (ASL, CART) must be submitted at least two weeks before the date scheduled for argument.

Counsel and staff must show photo identification and pass through security screening upon entering the courthouse.

Only Federal Circuit bar members may sit at counsel tables and address the panel in the courtroom.

Due to health and safety protocols, counsel and attendees must sit in assigned locations designated by courtroom staff at check-in.

Cite Document

Analyze

Search within this case
Analyze Judge
Analyze Party
- Neurelis
Analyze Firm
- Eversheds Sutherland
- Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

24 Other Hearing transcript: Other Hearing transcript

Document IPR2020-01534, No. 24 Other Hearing transcript - Other Hearing transcript (P.T.A.B. Apr. 13, 2022)

Cite Document

Analyze

Search within this case

33 Final Written Decision original: JUDGMENT Final Written Decision Determining A...

Document IPR2020-01532, No. 33 Final Written Decision original - JUDGMENT Final Written Decision Determining All Challenged Claims Unpatentable 35 USC 318a (P.T.A.B. Apr. 6, 2022)

Cite Document

Analyze

Search within this case

33 Final Written Decision original: JUDGMENT Final Written Decision Determining A...

Document IPR2020-01533, No. 33 Final Written Decision original - JUDGMENT Final Written Decision Determining All Challenged Claims Unpatentable 35 USC 318a (P.T.A.B. Apr. 6, 2022)