• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Displaying 1719-1733 of 669,526 results

Bourque v. LG Chem America, Inc. et al

Docket 4:13-cv-01412, California Northern District Court (Mar. 29, 2013)
Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, presiding, Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler
Anti-Trust
DivisionOakland
Cause15:1 Antitrust Litigation
Case Type410 Anti-Trust
Tags410 Anti-Trust, 410 Anti-Trust
Defendant Panasonic Corporation
Defendant Panasonic Corporation of North America
...
cite Cite Docket

Optical Devices LLC v. Panasonic Corporation et al

Docket 1:13-cv-00726, Delaware District Court (Apr. 25, 2013)
Judge Leonard P. Stark, presiding
Patent
DivisionWilmington
FlagsCLOSED, PATENT
DemandPlaintiff
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Defendant Panasonic Corporation
Defendant Panasonic Corporation of North America
...
cite Cite Docket

KING, TERRENCE M et al Vs. MOTOROLA MOBILITY, INC. et al

Docket 2012-CA-008533-B, District Of Columbia, Superior Court (Nov. 6, 2012)
Alfred S Irving, Brian F Holeman, Frederick H Weisberg, presiding
Case TypeCivil II
Defendant Of North America Panasonic Corp.
...
cite Cite Docket

Unopposed Joint Motion to Allow out of Time One Third-Party Deposition No. 746973

Document Certain IP Camera Systems including Video Doorbells and Components Thereof, 337-1242, No. 746973-1 (U.S.I.T.C. Jul. 15, 2021)
Ground Rule 5.1 Certification This is a joint motion of SimpliSafe, Inc., Vivint Smart Home, Inc. (“Respondents”) and third-party Panasonic i-Pro Sensing Solutions Corporation of America (“PIPSA”).
* * * Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.15(c), Respondents and third-party PIPSA jointly move to take the deposition of a corporate representative of PIPSA out of time the week of July 19 or July 26, and Complainants do not oppose the motion.
The parties diligently attempted to schedule the depositions during the fact discovery period.
No party will be prejudiced by allowing the deposition to be taken after the fact discovery cutoff and no other dates in the procedural schedule will be impacted.
For the foregoing reasons, Respondents and third-party PIPSA respectfully request that the Administrative Law Judge grant this motion to allow the deposition of PIPSA’s corporate representative during the week of July 19 or July 26.
cite Cite Document

Unopposed Joint Motion to Allow out of Time One Third-Party and One Party Deposition No. 746812

Document Certain IP Camera Systems including Video Doorbells and Components Thereof, 337-1242, No. 746812-1 (U.S.I.T.C. Jul. 14, 2021)
The deposition of Ms. Mejia, in her individual capacity and as a SkyBell corporate designee, is scheduled for July 20.
No party will be prejudiced by allowing the deposition to be taken after the fact discovery cutoff and no other dates in the procedural schedule will be impacted.
I, Debby Brady, hereby certify that on July 14, 2021, a copy of Unopposed Joint Motion to Allow Out of Time One Third-Party and One Party Deposition was served on the following as indicated:  Via EDIS  Via Hand Delivery  Via Overnight Courier
 Via First Class Mail  Via Hand Delivery  Via Overnight Courier  Via Facsimile  Via Email
The Honorable Lisa R. Barton Secretary U.S. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W.
cite Cite Document

PRESSIT

Docket 88926017, Trademark (May 20, 2020)
Case TypeTrademark
ClassTelecommunication machines and apparatus, namely, audio and video frequency transmission apparatus in the nature of audio and video frequency transformers; Wireless communication device featuring voice, data and image transmission; Digital media streaming devices; Downloadable computer software for controlling the operation of wireless communication devices; Downloadable computer software for data streaming via digital media streaming devices; Downloadable computer software for controlling the display and playback of video and audio recorders; 021; 023; 026; 036; 038
MarksPRESSIT
Original Registrant Panasonic Corporation
Subsequent Owner After Registration PANASONIC HOLDINGS CORPORATION
cite Cite Docket

Commission Opinion No. 711340

Document Certain Infotainment Systems, Components Thereof, and Automobiles Containing the Same, 337-1119, No. 711340-1 (U.S.I.T.C. May. 28, 2020)
However, the parties’ submissions in response to the Commission’s notice of review, the intrinsic record, and certain findings in the FID support construing the term to include Respondents’ second proposed limitation that the processor be separate from the hardware control block.
Broadcom’s “ Hardware Data Module” document describes the representative “________” as “a next-generation single-chip High Definition TV (HDTV) SoC delivering high- performance and low-power solutions for IP, cable, satellite, terrestrial, and over-the-top (OTT) ultra-small form factor set-top box (STB) applications.” RX-0337C.18 (BCMTOY0055591) (emphasis added).
With respect to claim 8, the FID finds that Broadcom’s expert “makes a convincing case for obviousness by explaining how one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that Foster’s memory interface is capable of receiving the requested data.” Id. at 100 (citing RX-0005C at Q/A93).
The Federal Circuit, however, rejected a similar argument in Ajinomoto Co., Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 932 F.3d 1342, 1354 n.8 (Fed. Cir. 2019), where the appellant failed to cite any authority that barred the Commission from exercising discretion to raise an issue and give the parties an adequate opportunity to address it.
The Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of non- infringement “[d]ue to a restriction built into the software program stored in the telephone’s memory, a user of the accused system is prevented from directly placing international calls.” Id. at 1330.
cite Cite Document

Unopposed Joint Motion to Allow out of Time One Third-Party and One Party Depostion No. 746701

Document Certain IP Camera Systems including Video Doorbells and Components Thereof, 337-1242, No. 746701-1 (U.S.I.T.C. Jul. 13, 2021)
The parties diligently attempted to schedule the depositions during the fact discovery period.
The deposition of Ms. Mejia, in her individual capacity and as a SkyBell corporate designee, is scheduled for July 20.
No party will be prejudiced by allowing the deposition to be taken after the fact discovery cutoff and no other dates in the procedural schedule will be impacted.
I, Debby Brady, hereby certify that on July 13, 2021, a copy of Unopposed Joint Motion to Allow Out of Time One Third-Party and One Party Deposition was served on the following as indicated:  Via EDIS  Via Hand Delivery  Via Overnight Courier
The Honorable Lisa R. Barton Secretary U.S. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W.
cite Cite Document

3

Document Jeske Vs Panasonic Consumer P Roduct Su, SC-000616-21, No. 3 (New Jersey State, Superior Court, Bergen County Jun. 30, 2021)
_______________, 2021, ORDERED that this matter is hereby It is on this ______ day of dismissed/disposed due to the following:
o WITH PREJUDICE o WITHOUT PREJUDICE
It is further ORDERED that the plaintiff/defendant shall serve a copy of the ORDER on the plaintiff/defendant within (10) days of the above date.
Joseph G. Monaghan, J.S.C.
cite Cite Document

Turner et al v. LG Chem, Ltd. et al

Docket 3:12-cv-02658, Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (Mar. 7, 2013)
Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, presiding
FlagsCLOSED, CTO_FINAL
Defendant Panasonic Corporation
Defendant Panasonic Corporation of North America
...
cite Cite Docket

HEARTMOTIVE

Docket 88858485, Trademark (April 3, 2020)
ClassElectric motors other than for land vehicles; Electricity generators; AC generators; DC generators; Compressors for machines; 013; 019; 021; 023; 024; 031; 034; 035; 021; 023; 026; 036; 038; 013; 021; 023; 024; 031; 034; 019; 021; 023; 031; 035; 044; 100; 101
MarksHEARTMOTIVE
Original Registrant Panasonic Corporation
Subsequent Owner After Registration PANASONIC AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS CO., LTD.
Subsequent Owner After Registration PANASONIC HOLDINGS CORPORATION
cite Cite Docket

Walner v. Samsung SDI Co., Ltd. et al

Docket 4:13-cv-01298, California Northern District Court (Mar. 22, 2013)
Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, presiding
Anti-Trust
DivisionOakland
Cause15:1 Antitrust Litigation
Case Type410 Anti-Trust
Tags410 Anti-Trust, 410 Anti-Trust
Defendant Panasonic Corporation
Defendant Panasonic Corporation of North America
...
cite Cite Docket

No. 537612816 - OGMANSI - Order Granting Motion to Answer Interrogatories

Document Unifund Ccr V Gonzalez, 20D03-0711-CC-00411, No. 537612816 (Indiana State, Elkhart County, Superior Court Sep. 11, 2019)
The garnishee defendant 1ST SOURCE BANK is now ordered to answer under oath the interrogatories set forth below or attached in writing on or before ______________, or, at your option, appear in Court and answer the interrogatories in person at the hearing.
Any claim or defense to the proceedings supplemental or garnishment order must be presented at the time and place of the hearing specified herein.
It is further ordered that garnishee defendant, a depository financial institution, is to place a 90-day hold on any deposit accounts in which the judgment defendant, JUAN G GONZALEZ, has an interest, either individually or jointly with another person, pursuant to IC 28-9-4-2, upon receipt of the documents, payment, and process required under subdivisions (1) through (5) of IC 28-9-3-4(b).
SHERIFF shall serve this Proceedings Supplemental as follows: ___ personal service _X_ leaving a copy at dwelling or place of employment CLERK shall serve the Proceedings Supplemental as follows: ___ regular mail ___ certified mail
SHERIFF shall serve this Proceedings Supplemental as follows, ___ personal service ___ leaving a copy at dwelling or place of business CLERK shall serve the Proceedings Supplemental as follows: ___ personal service by attorney ___ private process server, ___ other (describe in particular and note Trial Rule) _X_ certified mail OTHER manner of service: __attorney to serve __ private process server, __ other (describe in particular and note Trial Rule) J. Louis Kurtzer (19831-15) Unifund CCR Partners Assignee of Palisades Collection, LLC
cite Cite Document

No. 537611942 - OTA - Order to Appear

Document Unifund Ccr V Gonzalez, 20D03-0711-CC-00411, No. 537611942 (Indiana State, Elkhart County, Superior Court Sep. 11, 2019)
It may be that the Plaintiff has or will give notice to your bank or other persons holding properly or assets for you of the intent to put a hold on certain accounts held by you, either individually or jointly with another person, including but not limited to bank, share, and credit union accounts held by you, either individually or jointly with another person, including, but not limited to bank, share and credit union accounts.
If you call the court to determine your hearing date, please use the case number located at the top right-hand side of the front of this document.
However, if a joint depositor or you do not request an early hearing, each account on which a hold has been placed may not be released until the time you are ordered to appear.
SHERIFF shall serve this Proceedings Supplemental as follows: ___ personal service _X_ leaving a copy at dwelling or place of employment
SHERIFF shall serve this Proceedings Supplemental as follows, ___ personal service ___ leaving a copy at dwelling or place of business CLERK shall serve the Proceedings Supplemental as follows: ___ regular mail (Superior Court only) ___ certified mail CLERK shall serve the Proceedings Supplemental as follows: ___ personal service by attorney ___ private process server, ___ other (describe in particular and note Trial Rule) _X_ certified mail OTHER manner of service: __attorney to serve __ private process server, __ other (describe in particular and note Trial Rule) J. Louis Kurtzer (19831-15) Unifund CCR Partners Assignee of Palisades Collection, LLC
cite Cite Document

Sharp Electronics Corporation et al v. Hitachi, Ltd. et al

Docket CAN/3:13-cv-01173, Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (Mar. 15, 2013)
U.S. District Judge Jon S. Tigar, presiding
Defendant Panasonic Corporation
Defendant Panasonic Corporation of North America
Defendant Panasonic Consumer Electronics Co.
...
cite Cite Docket
<< 1 2 3 4 5 ... 115 116 117 118 119 ... >>