• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Displaying 24-38 of 252 results

No. 50 JOINT Claim Construction Chart, by Acceleration Bay, LLC

Document Acceleration Bay, LLC v. Amazon Web Services, Inc., 1:22-cv-00904, No. 50 (D.Del. Jun. 7, 2023)
14) in the above-captioned action, Plaintiff Acceleration Bay, LLC (“Acceleration Bay” or Plaintiff”) and Defendant Amazon Web Services, Inc. (“Amazon” or “Defendant”) submit this Joint Claim Construction Chart.
9/25/15 Petition for Inter Partes Review 10/14/16 Petitioner’s Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response [CONF] 3/23/17 Final Written Decision
9/24/15 Petition for Inter Partes Review 10/14/16 Petitioners’ Consolidated Reply to Patent Owner’s Response 3/23/17 Final Written Decision (with errata)
Defendants’ Proposed Construction & Intrinsic Support topology), 7 (“[t]he invention claimed in the ’069 Patent focuses on a process for adding nodes, or participants, to an existing network”).
See also ’344 File History (“Exhibit B-1a”) at April 24, 2002 Information Disclosure Statement (citing U.S. Patent Nos. 5,790,553, Acceleration Bay’s Proposed Construction & Intrinsic Support Amendment and Response; August 26, 2004, Notice of Allowance.
cite Cite Document

No. 80 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers denying 53 Motion ...

Document Epic Games, Inc. v. Acceleration Bay LLC, 5:19-cv-04133, No. 80 (N.D.Cal. Apr. 1, 2020)
Motion to StrikeDenied
Defendant Acceleration Bay LLC (“Acceleration Bay”) requests that the Court strike counterclaims-in-reply asserted by Plaintiff Epic Games, Inc. (“Epic Games”) in its counterclaim answer, or, in the alternative, to reclassify those counterclaims-in-reply as amendments to the complaint.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) permits a court to strike from a pleading an insufficient defense and “any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” Fed. R. Civ.
Acceleration Bay argues that Epic Games seeks an end-run around rules governing availability of inter partes review (“IPR”) by bringing its patent invalidity claims as counterclaims-in-reply.
In order to fulfill its role of streamlining invalidity proceedings, Congress limited a party’s ability to seek an IPR after commencement of civil litigation in two ways.
Acceleration Bay now argues that the Court has the sole power to prevent Epic Games from benefiting from an apparent loophole in the IPR statutory scheme.
cite Cite Document

No. 1 COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement with jury demand against Amazon Web Services, Inc. (Filing ...

Document Acceleration Bay, LLC v. Amazon Web Services, Inc., 1:22-cv-00904, No. 1 (D.Del. Jul. 6, 2022)
Complaint
Amazon Web Services, Inc. (“AWS Inc.”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, and upon information and belief, has its principal place of business at 410 Terry Avenue North, Seattle, Washington 98109.
Data will still be rapidly delivered, even if individual connections fail or operate slowly, because of the alternative pathways formed by the network, i.e. each neighbor is the start of a potential path to all other participants.
Lambda supports built-in fault tolerance and “maintains compute capacity across multiple Availability Zones (AZs) in each AWS Region to help protect ... code against individual machine or data center facility failures.
Amazon CloudFront “peers with thousands of Tier 1/2/3 telecom carriers globally, is well connected with all major access networks for optimal performance, and has hundreds of terabits of deployed capacity.
This allows VPC resources including EC2 instances, Amazon RDS databases and Lambda functions that run in different AWS Regions to communicate with each other using private IP addresses, without requiring gateways, VPN connections, or separate network appliances ... .
cite Cite Document

No. 183-2

Document Acceleration Bay, LLC v. Amazon Web Services, Inc., 1:22-cv-00904, No. 183-2 (D.Del. Jul. 24, 2024)

cite Cite Document

No. 183-1

Document Acceleration Bay, LLC v. Amazon Web Services, Inc., 1:22-cv-00904, No. 183-1 (D.Del. Jul. 24, 2024)

cite Cite Document

No. 53

Document Epic Games, Inc. v. Acceleration Bay LLC, 5:19-cv-04133, No. 53 (N.D.Cal. Dec. 17, 2019)

cite Cite Document

No. 1

Document Epic Games, Inc. v. Acceleration Bay LLC, 5:19-cv-04133, No. 1 (N.D.Cal. Jul. 18, 2019)

cite Cite Document

No. 49

Document Epic Games, Inc. v. Acceleration Bay LLC, 5:19-cv-04133, No. 49 (N.D.Cal. Dec. 5, 2019)

cite Cite Document

No. 47

Document Epic Games, Inc. v. Acceleration Bay LLC, 5:19-cv-04133, No. 47 (N.D.Cal. Dec. 3, 2019)

cite Cite Document

14 Decision Denying Request for Rehearing Petitioner: DECISIONDenying Petition...

Document IPR2017-01600, No. 14 Decision Denying Request for Rehearing Petitioner - DECISIONDenying Petitioners Request for Rehearing37 CFR § 4271d (P.T.A.B. Jun. 29, 2018)

cite Cite Document

11 Decision Denying Institution: Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review

Document IPR2017-01600, No. 11 Decision Denying Institution - Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review (P.T.A.B. Jan. 10, 2018)

cite Cite Document

9 Order: Authorizing Reply to Preliminary Response

Document IPR2017-01600, No. 9 Order - Authorizing Reply to Preliminary Response (P.T.A.B. Nov. 17, 2017)

cite Cite Document

5 Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition: Notice of Accord Filing Date

Document IPR2017-01600, No. 5 Notice of Filing Date Accorded to Petition - Notice of Accord Filing Date (P.T.A.B. Jul. 12, 2017)

cite Cite Document

13 Refund Approval: Notice of Refund

Document IPR2016-00726, No. 13 Refund Approval - Notice of Refund (P.T.A.B. Oct. 18, 2016)

cite Cite Document

11 Decision Denying Institution: Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review

Document IPR2016-00726, No. 11 Decision Denying Institution - Decision Denying Institution of Inter Partes Review (P.T.A.B. Sep. 9, 2016)

cite Cite Document
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 16 17 18 >>