• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
Displaying 9-23 of 531 results

SNMP Research, Inc. et al v. Broadcom Inc. et al

Docket 3:20-cv-00451, Tennessee Eastern District Court (Oct. 26, 2020)
District Judge Charles E Atchley, Jr, presiding, Magistrate Judge Debra C Poplin
Copyright
DivisionKnoxville
FlagsAO120, CEA1, ISSUE_JOINED, SETTLED
Cause17:101 Copyright Infringement
Case Type820 Copyright
Tags820 Copyright, 820 Copyright
DeadlineFinal Pretrial Conference set for 7/14/2025 02:00 PM in Knoxville before District Judge Charles E Atchley Jr.
DeadlineSCHEDULING ORDER: Jury Trial set for 8/5/2025 09:00 AM in Knoxville before District Judge Charles E Atchley Jr.
Plaintiff SNMP Research, Inc.
Plaintiff SNMP Research International, Inc.
Defendant Broadcom Inc.
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Fishon et al v. Peloton Interactive, Inc.

Docket 1:19-cv-11711, New York Southern District Court (Dec. 20, 2019)
Judge Lorna G. Schofield, presiding
Contract - Product Liability
DivisionFoley Square
FlagsECF
Demand$5,000,000
Cause28:1332 Diversity Action
Case Type195 Contract - Product Liability
Tags195 Contract, Contract, Civil, Product Liability, 195 Contract, Contract, Civil, Product Liability
Plaintiff Eric Fishon
Plaintiff Alicia Pearlman
Plaintiff Patrick Yang
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Botta v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP et al

Docket 3:18-cv-02615, California Northern District Court (May 3, 2018)
Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse, presiding, Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hixson (Settlement)
Civil Rights - Jobs
DivisionSan Francisco
FlagsADRMOP, CLOSED, CONSENT, PRVADR, REFSET-TSH
Cause42:2003 Job Discrimination
Case Type442 Civil Rights - Jobs
Tags442 Civil Rights, Jobs, 442 Civil Rights, Jobs
Botta
Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

In Re: Gold King Mine Release in San Juan County, Colorado, on August 5, 2015

Docket 1:18-md-02824, New Mexico District Court (Apr. 4, 2018)
Chief District Judge William P. Johnson, presiding
Environmental Matters
08/11/2022
... Partial Summary Judgment to Dismiss the Bellwether Allen Plaintiffs' and McDaniel Plaintiffs' Claims for Noneconomic Damages. Related document(s): (1475 in 1:18-md-02824-WJ, 469...
04/25/2022
... Motion for Partial Summary Judgment to Dismiss the Bellwether Allen Plaintiffs' and McDaniel Plaintiffs' Claims for Noneconomic Damages filed by Weston Solutions, Inc. Associated ...
04/22/2022
... Response to Motion for Partial Summary Judgment to Dismiss the Bellwether Allen Plaintiffs and McDaniel Plaintiffs Claims for Noneconomic Damages Associated Cases: 1:18-md-02824-WJ, 1:17-cv-00710-WJ-SCY, 1:1...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

No. 187 JUDGMENT AND COMMITMENT by Judge George H Wu as to Defendant Jacob Wolfgang Gonzalez (1), ...

Document USA v. Gonzalez et al, 2:23-cr-00427, No. 187 (C.D.Cal. Mar. 10, 2025)
Motion for JudgmentGranted
Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant, Jacob Wolfgang Gonzalez, is hereby committed on Count 10 of the Indictment to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of 60 months.
The defendant shall participate in an outpatient substance abuse treatment and counseling program that includes urinalysis, breath or sweat patch testing, as directed by the Probation Officer.
If all or any portion of a fine or restitution ordered remains unpaid after the termination of supervision, the defendant must pay the balance as directed by the United States Attorney’s Office.
The defendant must notify the Court (through the Probation Office) and the United States Attorney of any material change in the defendant’s economic circumstances that might affect the defendant’s ability to pay a fine or restitution, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k).
The defendant must not transfer, sell, give away, or otherwise convey any asset with a fair market value in excess of $500 without approval of the Probation Officer until all financial obligations imposed by the Court have been satisfied in full.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 190 [AMENDED] JUDGMENT AND COMMITMENT by Judge George H Wu as to Defendant Joshua Nathan Bedard ...

Document USA v. Gonzalez et al, 2:23-cr-00427, No. 190 (C.D.Cal. Mar. 7, 2025)
Motion for JudgmentGranted
Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant, Joshua Nathan Bedard, is hereby committed on Counts 1 and 6 of the Indictment to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of TIME SERVED.
The defendant shall participate in an outpatient substance abuse treatment and counseling program that includes urinalysis, breath or sweat patch testing, as directed by the Probation Officer.
If all or any portion of a fine or restitution ordered remains unpaid after the termination of supervision, the defendant must pay the balance as directed by the United States Attorney’s Office.
The defendant must notify the Court (through the Probation Office) and the United States Attorney of any material change in the defendant’s economic circumstances that might affect the defendant’s ability to pay a fine or restitution, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k).
The defendant must not transfer, sell, give away, or otherwise convey any asset with a fair market value in excess of $500 without approval of the Probation Officer until all financial obligations imposed by the Court have been satisfied in full.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 184 JUDGMENT AND COMMITMENT by Judge George H Wu as to Defendant Joshua Nathan Bedard (3), Count(s) ...

Document USA v. Gonzalez et al, 2:23-cr-00427, No. 184 (C.D.Cal. Mar. 7, 2025)
Motion for JudgmentGranted
Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant, Joshua Nathan Bedard, is hereby committed on Counts 1 and 6 of the Indictment to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of TIME SERVED.
The defendant shall participate in an outpatient substance abuse treatment and counseling program that includes urinalysis, breath or sweat patch testing, as directed by the Probation Officer.
If all or any portion of a fine or restitution ordered remains unpaid after the termination of supervision, the defendant must pay the balance as directed by the United States Attorney’s Office.
The defendant must notify the Court (through the Probation Office) and the United States Attorney of any material change in the defendant’s economic circumstances that might affect the defendant’s ability to pay a fine or restitution, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k).
The defendant must not transfer, sell, give away, or otherwise convey any asset with a fair market value in excess of $500 without approval of the Probation Officer until all financial obligations imposed by the Court have been satisfied in full.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 528 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 494 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Document Under Seal filed ...

Document SNMP Research, Inc. et al v. Broadcom Inc. et al, 3:20-cv-00451, No. 528 (E.D.Tenn. Mar. 3, 2025)
Motion to File DocumentGranted
Defendant seeks leave to file the following documents either fully or partially under seal: Defendant’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Exclude the Opinions of Quentin Mimms (“Mimms Opposition”), Defendant’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (“SJ Opposition”), and Exhibits 3, 4, 6–15 to the Supplemental Declaration of Sy Damle (“Damle Declaration”).
On October 26, 2020, the Court entered the Memorandum and Order Regarding Sealing Confidential Information (“Order”) [Doc. 11] that sets forth the standard and procedure for filing
With respect to the standard, the Order states that a party requesting leave to seal documents has a “very high barrier ... to overcome the presumption of openness as to a court’s record” [Id. at 1 (citation omitted)].
Defendant states that the excerpts contain its “confidential business information, including specific references to [Defendant’s] operating expenses, sales, and research and development expenditures” [Id. (citation omitted)].
Given that Defendant will refile these documents, to maintain an orderly docket, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to DELETE the Damle Declaration [Doc. 505] and Exhibits 1, 3, and 5 thereto [Docs.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 529 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 508 MOTION for Leave to File Document Under Seal filed by SNMP ...

Document SNMP Research, Inc. et al v. Broadcom Inc. et al, 3:20-cv-00451, No. 529 (E.D.Tenn. Mar. 3, 2025)
Motion to File DocumentGranted
With respect to the standard, the Order states that a party requesting leave to seal documents has a “very high barrier ... to overcome the presumption of openness as to a court’s record” [Id. at 1 (citation omitted)].
The Order explains, “It is highly unlikely that the Court will place entire motions and their supporting documents under seal.
To do so would eliminate from the public record all bases for any ruling upon the motion by the Court thereby eviscerating the public’s First Amendment right of access.” [Id. at 3].
Starting with the Case Declaration, Plaintiffs contend that it contains “[Defendant’s] confidential shipment information and sales figures” [Doc. 508 p. 3].
In addition, Plaintiffs submit that Exhibit Y “contains [Defendant’s] commercially sensitive information regarding the sales and volume” and that “Exhibit AG contains a confidential settlement communication” [Id. at 2–3; see also Doc. 520 p. 2].
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 530 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 512 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Document Under Seal filed ...

Document SNMP Research, Inc. et al v. Broadcom Inc. et al, 3:20-cv-00451, No. 530 (E.D.Tenn. Mar. 3, 2025)
Motion to File DocumentGranted
With respect to the standard, the Order states that a party requesting leave to seal documents has a “very high barrier ... to overcome the presumption of openness as to a court’s record” [Id. at 1 (citation omitted)].
The Order explains, “It is highly unlikely that the Court will place entire motions and their supporting documents under seal.
Starting with Exhibit 1 to the Damle Declaration, Defendant states that it is a confidential settlement agreement between Plaintiffs and a third party [Doc. 512 pp. 1–2].
With respect to the Chandler Reply, Defendant states that it contains references to the Damle Declaration, Exhibit 1 thereto, and “other confidential settlement agreements between Plaintiffs and non-parties” [Doc. 512 p. 2].
Given that Defendant will refile these documents, to maintain an orderly docket, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to DELETE the Declaration of Sy Damle in Support of Extreme Networks, Inc.’s Replies in Support of Motions for Summary Judgment, to Exclude Opinions of Mark Chandler, and to Exclude Opinions of Ravi Dhar, Scott Bradner, and Michael J. Wallace [Doc. 518].
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 531 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 525 MOTION for Leave to File Document Under Seal filed by SNMP ...

Document SNMP Research, Inc. et al v. Broadcom Inc. et al, 3:20-cv-00451, No. 531 (E.D.Tenn. Mar. 3, 2025)
Motion to File DocumentGranted
With respect to the standard, the Order states that a party requesting leave to seal documents has a “very high barrier ... to overcome the presumption of openness as to a court’s record” [Id. at 1 (citation omitted)].
The Order explains, “It is highly unlikely that the Court will place entire motions and their supporting documents under seal.
The Court has reviewed the redactions, which are narrowly tailored, and finds good cause to grant Plaintiffs’ motion.
Plaintiffs shall note the docket entry of the sealed version on the first page of reply briefs.
Given that Plaintiffs will refile these documents, to maintain an orderly docket, the Court DIRECTS the Clerk’s Office to DELETE the placeholders [Docs.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 527 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Document SNMP Research, Inc. et al v. Broadcom Inc. et al, 3:20-cv-00451, No. 527 (E.D.Tenn. Mar. 3, 2025)
In addition, the parties state that they met and conferred, and “have agreed that certain documents subject to the First Motions to Seal can be filed on the public docket with more limited redactions” [Id.].
With respect to the standard, the Order states that a party requesting leave to seal documents has a “very high barrier ... to overcome the presumption of openness as to a court’s record” [Id. at 1 (citation omitted)].
The parties request that it be sealed in its entirety because “[m]ore than half of this expert report discusses [Defendant’s] confidential pricing and sales information” [Id.].
In addition, they state that “[t]he report also refers to confidential settlement terms between Plaintiffs and non- parties, as well as Plaintiffs’ proprietary pricing information” [Id.].
The Court finds that the parties have shown good cause to place these documents under seal as follows:  Exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, J, L, M, and V to the Case Declaration [Docs.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 155 JUDGMENT AND COMMITMENT by Judge George H Wu as to Defendant Kristopher Chase Malilay (2), ...

Document USA v. Gonzalez et al, 2:23-cr-00427, No. 155 (C.D.Cal. Feb. 4, 2025)
Motion for JudgmentGranted
Pursuantto the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant, Kristopher Chase Malilay, is hereby committed on Counts 1 and 12 of the Indictmentto the custody of the Bureau ofPrisons for a term of 24 months.
The defendant shall participate in an outpatient substance abuse treatment and counseling program that includes urinalysis, breath or sweat patch testing, as directed by the Probation Officer.
If all or any portion of a fine or restitution ordered remains unpaid after the termination of supervision, the defendant must pay the balance as directed by the United States Attorney’s Office.
The defendant must notify the Court (through the Probation Office) and the United States Attorney of any material change in the defendant’s economic circumstances that might affect the defendant’s ability to pay a fine or restitution, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3664(k).
The defendant must not transfer, sell, give away, or otherwise convey any asset with a fair market value in excess of $500 without approval of the Probation Officer until all financial obligations imposed by the Court have been satisfied in full.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 35 JUDGMENT REVOKING SUPERVISED RELEASE by Judge Mark C. Scarsi as to Jose Antonio Barajas; Re: ...

Document USA v. Barajas, 2:23-cr-00026, No. 35 (C.D.Cal. Sep. 18, 2024)
Motion for Judgment
On September 16, 2024, Alexander S. Gorin, AUSA, the attorney for the government appeared, and the defendant, Jose Antonio Barajas, appeared with appointed counsel Shannon M. Coit, DFPD; and defendant admitted to allegations one, two, three, four, and five, as charged in the petition filed on June 11, 2024.
THE COURT FINDS that the defendant violated the terms and conditions of the order of supervised release of August 28, 2023, and ORDERS that the order of supervised release are hereby revoked, vacated, and set aside.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED, upon the findings of the Court, that supervised release is revoked and the defendant is hereby committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons for a term of 10 months as to Count 1, with no supervision to follow.
/ / Case 2:23-cr-00026-MCS Document35_Filed 09/18/24 Page2of2 Page ID #:230 UNITED STATES OF AMERICAv.
Case No. 2:23-cr-00026-MCS-1 The Court recommendsthat the defendantbe housed at the Metropolitan Detention Center to facilitate family visits.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 336 ORDER denying without prejudice to renewal by formal motion 294 Motion for Summary Judgment; ...

Document Fishon et al v. Peloton Interactive, Inc., 1:19-cv-11711, No. 336 (S.D.N.Y. Sep. 12, 2024)
The parties are directed to review the Court’s Individual Rules to ensure compliance of any related declarations and exhibits.
Plaintiffs shall file a memorandum of law, not to exceed 25 pages, by October 9, 2024.
Defendant shall file a memorandum of law in opposition, not to exceed 25 pages, by November 6, 2024.
Plaintiffs shall file a reply memorandum of law, not to exceed 10 pages, by November 19, 2024.
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions at Dkts.
cite Cite Document
Analyze
<< 1 2 3 4 5 ... >>