• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
5 results

Dali Wireless, Inc. v. Corning, Inc. et al

Docket 6:20-cv-00827, Texas Western District Court (Sept. 9, 2020)
Judge Alan D Albright, presiding
Patent
DivisionWaco
FlagsCLOSED, PATENT
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Plaintiff Dali Wireless, Inc.
Defendant Corning, Inc.
Defendant Corning Optical Communications LLC
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Home Run House, LLC v. The Cincinnati Indemnity Company et al

Docket 1:20-cv-00827, Texas Western District Court (Aug. 6, 2020)
Judge Lee Yeakel, presiding
Insurance
DivisionAustin
FlagsMOTION_REFERRED
Demand$200,000,000
Cause28:1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract
Case Type110 Insurance
Tags110 Insurance, 110 Insurance
Plaintiff Home Run House, LLC
Defendant The Cincinnati Indemnity Company
Defendant Michael Murphy
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Roy v. Pointer et al

Docket 5:20-cv-00827, Texas Western District Court (July 15, 2020)
Judge Xavier Rodriguez, presiding
Motor Vehicle
DivisionSan Antonio
FlagsCLOSED
Cause28:1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Case Type350 Motor Vehicle
Tags350 Vehicle, 350 Vehicle
Plaintiff Leon Michael Roy
Defendant Larry Pointer
Defendant Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

No. 10 ORDER GRANTING 8 Motion to Remand to State Court, Plaintiffs request forattorneys fees and ...

Document Roy v. Pointer et al, 5:20-cv-00827, No. 10 (W.D.Tex. Aug. 21, 2020)
Motion to RemandGranted
Plaintiff Leon Michael Roy filed this action on December 31, 2018 against Larry Pointer and Swift Transportation Company of Arizona, LLC in state court for damages arising from a motor vehicle collision.
Plaintiff’s original petition specifically alleged that his damages as of the time of filing did not exceed $75,000.
On July 15, 2020, Defendant Swift Transportation filed a Notice of Removal, asserting that it first became aware of the existence of diversity jurisdiction on June 30, 2020 when Plaintiff testified at his deposition that his damages were in excess of $375,000.
2001) (“Nor does the joint representation of the removing and non-removing defendants by a single attorney create an implied joinder or consent ... .”).
Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees and costs is denied because the Court finds Swift had a good faith basis for removal and simply made a procedural error.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 1 COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0542-13949484)

Document Dali Wireless, Inc. v. Corning, Inc. et al, 6:20-cv-00827, No. 1 (W.D.Tex. Sep. 9, 2020)
Complaint
Particularly in DAS- SFR, since none of the DRUs except the central DRU operates in F2and F3 it is possible to apply the above- mentioned method (distinguishing between the interior and the exterior users) using the received CQIs ...
00 = None 18 = LC APC duplex 66 = SC APC duplex |4 Select cu conductor count.
K = Two strain-relief trunk holders (see Note 3) N = None CORNING Corning Optical Communications Wirelessr Inc.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Can’t find a case you think should be here?

Use our supplemental search tool to find dockets that you may not see here. Information on Fees

Start a Supplemental Search