• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Displaying 24-38 of 339 results

No. 130 ORDER granting 128 Unopposed MOTION to Amend/Correct Leave to Amend Invalidity Contentions

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 130 (E.D.Tex. Aug. 17, 2023)
Before the Court, defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. move unopposed for Leave to Amend Invalidity Contentions.
Dkt. No. 128.
Having considered the motion, and noting its unopposed nature, it is GRANTED.
cite Cite Document

No. 126 ORDER granting 125 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 126 (E.D.Tex. Aug. 14, 2023)
Motion to Withdraw as CounselGranted
Before the Court, plaintiff CardWare Inc. moves unopposed to withdraw Charles Bullock as counsel of record for CardWare Inc. Dkt. No. 125.
Having considered the motion, it is GRANTED.
Charles Bullock, is hereby withdrawn as counsel of record, and the Clerk of Court is directed to terminate any further ECF notices to the same.
cite Cite Document

No. 1 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ATXWDC-19423774), filed ...

Document CardWare Inc. v. Apple Inc., 7:24-cv-00279, No. 1 (W.D.Tex. Nov. 4, 2024)
Complaint
Apple has willfully, knowingly, and intentionally actively aided, abetted, and induced others to directly infringe at least claim 10 of the ’520 Patent under 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b) (such as its customers in this District and throughout the United States), and continues to do so, by, for example, selling, offering for sale, and encouraging its customers in this District and throughout the United States to use its Accused Products in an infringing manner by providing information and technical support, including in promotional materials, product manuals, brochures, videos, demonstrations, and website materials.
Apple has willfully, knowingly, and intentionally actively aided, abetted, and induced others to directly infringe at least claim 11 of the ’820 Patent under 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b) (such as its customers in this District an throughout the United States), and continues to do so, by, for example, selling, offering for sale, and encouraging its customers in this District and throughout the United States to use its Accused Products in an infringing manner by providing information and technical support, including in promotional materials, product manuals, brochures, videos, demonstrations, and website materials.
Apple has willfully, knowingly, and intentionally actively aided, abetted, and induced others to directly infringe at least claim 19 of the ’579 Patent under 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b) (such as its customers in this District and throughout the United States), and continues to do so, by, for example, selling, offering for sale, and encouraging its customers in this District and throughout the United States to use its Accused Products in an infringing manner by providing information and technical support, including in promotional materials, product manuals, brochures, videos, demonstrations, and website materials.
Apple has willfully, knowingly, and intentionally actively aided, abetted, and induced others to directly infringe at least claim 19 of the ’538 Patent under 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b) (such as its customers in this District and throughout the United States), and continues to do so, by, for example, selling, offering for sale, and encouraging its customers in this District and throughout the United States to use its Accused Products in an infringing manner by providing information and technical support, including in promotional materials, product manuals, brochures, videos, demonstrations, and website materials.
Apple has willfully, knowingly, and intentionally actively aided, abetted, and induced others to directly infringe at least claim 20 of the ’286 Patent under 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b) (such as its customers in this District and throughout the United States), and continues to do so, by, for example, selling, offering or sale, and encouraging its customers in this District and throughout the United States to use its Accused Products in an infringing manner by providing information and technical support, including in promotional materials, product manuals, brochures, videos, demonstrations, and website materials.
cite Cite Document

No. 118 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne: Markman Hearing held ...

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 118 (E.D.Tex. Aug. 8, 2023)
Allan Soobert Ariell Bratton Jason Mikus Melissa Smith David Keyzer Kyle Dockendorf Shawn McRoberts Becky Andrews Matthew Berkowitz Eric Findlay Navid Bayar
Eric Findlay introduced co-counsel and announced ready.
Melissa Smith introduced co-counsel and announced ready.
Matt Berkowitz presented argument on behalf of Plaintiff.
Allan Soobert and Jason Mikus presented argument on behalf of Defendants.
cite Cite Document

No. 108 SECOND AMENDED DOCKET CONTROL ORDER granting 106 Unopposed MOTION to Amend/Correct Plaintiff ...

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 108 (E.D.Tex. Jul. 12, 2023)
2 Given the Court’s past experiences with litigants dropping claims and defenses during or on the eve of trial, the Court is of the opinion that these additional deadlines are necessary.
The Court finds that the Parties are best suited to evaluate whether mediation will benefit the case after the issuance of the Court’s claim construction order.
For expert-related motions, complete digital copies of the relevant expert report(s) and accompanying exhibits shall be submitted on a single flash drive to the Court.
Complete digital copies of the expert report(s) shall be delivered to the Court no later than the dispositive motion deadline.
The fact that there are motions for summary judgment or motions to dismiss pending; The fact that one or more of the attorneys is set for trial in another court on the same day, unless the other setting was made prior to the date of this order or was made as a special provision for the parties in the other case; The failure to complete discovery prior to trial, unless the parties can demonstrate that it was impossible to complete discovery despite their good faith effort to do so.
cite Cite Document

No. 97 ORDER granting 94 Joint MOTION Entry of Order Focusing Claims and Prior Art to Reduce Costs

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 97 (E.D.Tex. Jun. 9, 2023)
While the parties agree to most of the Court’s model order focusing patent claims and prior art to reduce cost, Cardware seeks to modify paragraph 3 thereof to modify the “28 day” window before service of expert reports to serve a final election of asserted claims to a “14 day” window.
Having considered the dispute, the Court is not persuaded that the full modification sought by Cardware is necessary for the promotion of a “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination” of this action.
It streamlines the issues in this case to promote a “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination” of this action, as provided by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1.
Subject to Court approval, the parties may modify this Order by agreement, but should endeavor to limit the asserted claims and prior art references to the greatest extent possible.
Absent agreement, post-entry motions to modify this Order’s numerical limits on 1 For purposes of this Order, a prior art instrumentality (such as a device or process) and associated references that describe that instrumentality shall count as one reference, as shall the closely related work of a single prior artist.
cite Cite Document

No. 92 ORDER

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 92 (E.D.Tex. May. 30, 2023)
Magistrate Judge Payne entered a Memorandum Order (Dkt. No. 71) denying the Motion.
Defendants filed objections (Dkt. No. 73) with Plaintiff Cardware Inc. ("Plaintiff") filing a response, Dkt. No. 76.
Thereafter, Samsung moved for leave to file a reply (Dkt. No. 84) and Plaintiff moved for leave to file a sur-reply (Dkt. No. 85).
After conducting a de novo review of the briefing on the motion, the Memorandum Order, and the briefing on the objections, the Court agrees with the reasoning provided within the Memorandum Order and concludes that the objections fail to show that the Memorandum Order was erroneous.
Consequently, the Court REJECTS Samsung’s objections and ORDERS that the Motion (Dkt. No. 32) is DENIED.
cite Cite Document

No. 87 ORDER granting 84 Unopposed SEALED MOTION for Leave to File Reply to Correct the Record Concerning ...

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 87 (E.D.Tex. May. 23, 2023)
Motion to File ReplyGranted
Before the Court is Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.’s Unopposed Motion for Leave to File a Reply to Correct the Record Concerning Objections to the Order Denying Motion for Transfer under Section 1404(A).
(Dkt. No. 84).
After consideration of said motion, it is hereby GRANTED.
SIGNED this 3rd day of January, 2012.
SIGNED this 23rd day of May, 2023.
cite Cite Document

No. 86 ORDER - David Keyzer is appointed as the Courts technical advisor

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 86 (E.D.Tex. May. 23, 2023)
It is ORDERED that David Keyzer is appointed as the Court’s technical advisor in the above-captioned case, with his fees and expenses to be assessed equally between Plaintiff and Defendants and timely paid as billed.
If the document was filed with the Court, the copy must include the CM/ECF header.
For claim construction materials that have already been filed, the filing party is ORDERED to provide copies to Mr. Keyzer within two business days.
Otherwise, the filing party is ORDERED to provide copies to Mr. Keyzer no later than one business day after filing future claim construction material.
cite Cite Document

No. 88 ORDER granting 85 Unopposed SEALED MOTION for Leave to File a Sur-Reply Concerning the Objections ...

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 88 (E.D.Tex. May. 23, 2023)
Motion to FileGranted
Before the Court is Plaintiff CardWare Inc.’s Unopposed Motion for Leave to File a Sur- Reply Concerning the Objections to the Order Denying Motion for Transfer Under Section 1404(a).
(Dkt. No. 85).
The Court having reviewed the Motion, it is hereby GRANTED.
SIGNED this 3rd day of January, 2012.
SIGNED this 23rd day of May, 2023.
cite Cite Document

No. 83 ORDER REGARDING E-DISCOVERY granting 79 Joint MOTION for Entry of Agreed E-Discovery Order

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 83 (E.D.Tex. May. 15, 2023)
It streamlines Electronically Stored Information (“ESI”) production to promote a “just, speedy, and inexpensive determination” of this action, as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1.
Absent a showing of good cause, general ESI production requests under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 34 and 45, or compliance with a mandatory disclosure requirement of this Court, shall not include metadata.
General ESI production requests under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 34 and 45, or compliance with a mandatory disclosure order of this court, shall not include e-mail or other forms of electronic correspondence (collectively “e-mail”).
The court shall consider contested requests for additional or fewer custodians per producing Side, upon showing a distinct need based on the size, complexity, and issues of this specific case.
The court shall consider contested requests for additional or fewer search terms per custodian, upon showing a distinct need based on the size, complexity, and issues of this specific case.
cite Cite Document

No. 82 ORDER granting 77 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 82 (E.D.Tex. May. 15, 2023)
Motion to Withdraw as CounselGranted
Before the Court, plaintiff CardWare Inc. moves unopposed to withdraw Lillian Mao, of
Shearman & Sterling LLP as counsel of record.
Dkt. No. 77.
Having considered the motion, it is GRANTED.
Lillian Mao, of Shearman & Sterling LLP, is hereby withdrawn as counsel of record, and the Clerk of Court is ORDERED to terminate any further ECF notices to the same.
cite Cite Document

No. 71 MEMORANDUM ORDER re 32 SEALED MOTION Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.'s and Samsung ...

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 71 (E.D.Tex. Apr. 8, 2023)
While “clearly more convenient” is not necessarily equivalent to “clear and convincing,” the moving party “must show materially more than a mere preponderance of convenience, lest the standard have no real or practical meaning.” Quest NetTech Corp. v. Apple, Inc., No. 2:19-cv-118, 2019 WL 6344267, at *7 (E.D.
Samsung also argues it intends to subpoena third party NDCA companies like Visa, Apple, Google, eBay, and Paypal for its non-infringement and invalidity defenses.
Moreover, and as argued by Cardware, Samsung’s 30(b)(6) deponent Sridhar Kavuri testified that the current SRA employees who belonged on the development team no longer work on the payment framework for Samsung Pay, Dkt. No. 62-15 at 40:10-21, and the remaining members of the development team are no longer employed by SRA do not have knowledge that current employees of Samsung would not possess, Id. at 66:13-67:12.
Samsung also argues its intent to subpoena witnesses from third party NDCA companies like Visa, Apple, Google, eBay, and Paypal for information regarding “tokenization” technology for its non-infringement and invalidity defenses.
Additionally, Cardware argues that Samsung has a significant presence in Plano, Texas which carries out testing on and marketing efforts over the accused products.
cite Cite Document

No. 64 ORDER denying 61 MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review and Post-Grant Review Proceedings

Document CardWare Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, 2:22-cv-00141, No. 64 (E.D.Tex. Feb. 16, 2023)
Motion to Stay Pending Inter Partes ReviewDenied
Before the Court, defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. move to stay the case pending resolution of inter partes review (“IPR”) and post- grant review (“PGR”) proceedings before the USPTO.
Notably, the petitions were filed between November of 2022 and January of 2023, meaning a decision to institute IPR and PGR has yet to occur.
“ In this district, courts usually deny motions for stay when the PTAB has not acted on a petition for inter partes review.” Perdiemco LLC v. Telular Corp., 2017 WL 2444736, at *2 (E.D.
June 6, 2017) (citing Trover Group, Inc. v. Dedicated Micros USA, 2015 WL 1069179, at *6 (E.D.
Accordingly, the motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as premature.
cite Cite Document

No. 28 STATUS REPORT Case Readiness Status Report by CardWare Inc

Document CardWare Inc. v. Apple Inc., 7:24-cv-00279, No. 28 (W.D.Tex. Jan. 17, 2025)
(collectively, “the Parties”) hereby provide the following status report pursuant to the Court’s Standing Order Governing Proceedings (OGP) 4.4—Patent Cases (“OGP”).
Accordingly, if it pleases the Court, and in the interest of judicial efficiency, Plaintiff believes that the present proceeding and the Google case should be consolidated for pretrial proceedings, or their case schedules coordinated for claim construction purposes through the Markman hearing.
The following IPR, CBM, or other PGR proceedings were terminated before filing of the present proceeding:     Case No. PGR2023-00012, against U.S. Patent No. 11,328,286, was filed on January 20, 2023 and docketed on February 14, 2023, instituted on August 11, 2023, and terminated by agreement of the parties on November 21, 2023.
Case No. PGR2023-00013, against U.S. Patent No. 11,328,286, was filed January 20, 2023 and docketed on February 14, 2023, instituted on August 11, 2023, and terminated by agreement of the parties on November 21, 2023.
Case No. IPR2023-00314, against U.S. Patent No. 10,628,820, was filed December 23, 2022 and docketed on January 20, 2023, instituted on July 18, 2023, and terminated by agreement of the parties on November 21, 2023.
cite Cite Document
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... >>