Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 4126

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 4126"

Transcription

1 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 4126 ALACRITECH, INC., IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Plaintiff, Case No. 2:16-cv-693-JRG-RSP v. CENTURYLINK COMMUNICATIONS LLC, et al. LEAD CASE JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendants. ALACRITECH, INC., Plaintiff, v. WINSTRON CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 2:16-cv-692-JRG-RSP JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MEMBER CASE Defendants. ALACRITECH, INC., Plaintiff, v. DELL INC., Case No. 2:16-cv-695-RWS-RSP JURY TRIAL DEMANDED MEMBER CASE INTEL CORPORATION, Defendant. Intervenor. JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING STATEMENT PURSUANT TO PATENT RULE / INTEL Ex

2 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 4127 Pursuant to Patent Rule 4-3 and the Court s Docket Control Order, Plaintiff Alacritech, Inc. ( Alacritech ) and Intervenor and Defendants (collectively, Defendants ) hereby submit this Joint Claim Statement. A. CONSTRUCTION OF THOSE CLAIM TERMS, PHRASES, OR CLAUSES ON WHICH THE PARTIES AGREE The parties do not presently agree on the constructions of any terms. B. EACH PARTY S PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF EACH DISPUTED CLAIM TERM, PHRASE, OR CLAUSE, TOGETHER WITH AN IDENTIFICATION OF INTRINSIC AND OTHER EVIDENCE Exhibits A and B, attached hereto, identify the disputed claim terms. Exhibit A contains Alacritech s proposed constructions for each disputed claim term and intrinsic and other evidence in support; contains Defendants proposed constructions for each disputed claim term and intrinsic and other evidence in support. C. THE ANTICIPATED LENGTH OF TIME NECESSARY FOR THE CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING The parties anticipate that two hours per side will be sufficient time to present the parties respective positions. Hearing. D. POSSIBLE WITNESSES AT THE CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING The parties do not presently intend to call any witnesses at the Claim E. OTHER ISSUES WHICH MIGHT APPROPRIATELY BE TAKEN UP AT A PREHEARING CONFERENCE PRIOR TO THE CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING The parties are not aware of any other issues that should be taken up at a pre-hearing conference before the Claim Hearing / INTEL Ex

3 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 4128 Dated: February 21, 2017 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP /s/ Joseph M. Paunovich Claude M. Stern California State Bar No claudestern@quinnemanuel.com QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 555 Twin Dolphin Drive, 5th Floor Redwood Shores, CA Telephone: (650) Facsimile: (650) Joseph M. Paunovich joepaunovich@quinnemanuel.com California State Bar No Jordan Brock Kaericher California State Bar No jordankaericher@quinnemanuel.com QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor Los Angeles, CA Telephone: (213) Facsimile: (213) T. John Ward, Jr. Texas State Bar No jw@wsfirm.com Claire Abernathy Henry Texas State Bar No claire@wsfirm.com WARD & SMITH LAW FIRM 1507 Bill Owens Parkway Longview, Texas Telephone: (903) Facsimile: (903) ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF ALACRITECH, INC. Respectfully submitted, WEIL GOTSHAL & MANGES, LLP /s/ Garland T. Stephens Garland T. Stephens, Lead Attorney ( ) Douglas W. McClellan ( ) Melissa L. Hotze ( ) Justin L. Constant ( ) Richard D. Eiszner (65891) WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 700 Louisiana, Suite 1700 Houston, TX Telephone: (713) Facsimile: (713) garland.stephens@weil.com doug.mcclellan@weil.com melissa.hotze@weil.com justin.constant@weil.com richard.eiszner@weil.com Anne Marie Cappella (181402) Jeremy Jason Lang (255642) Amanda K. Branch (300860) WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 201 Redwood Shores Parkway Redwood Shores, CA Telephone: (650) Facsimile: (650) anne.cappella@weil.com jason.lang@weil.com amanda.branch@weil.com William Sutton Ansley (80085) WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 1300 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 900 Washington, DC Telephone: (202) Facsimile: (202) sutton.ansley@weil.com David Mitchell DesRosier (676024) WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 100 Federal Street, 34th Floor Boston, MA / INTEL Ex

4 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 4129 Telephone: (617) Facsimile: (617) david.desrosier@weil.com Harry L. Gillam, Jr. ( ) Gillam & Smith LLP 303 S. Washington Ave. Marshall, TX Telephone: (903) Facsimile: (903) gil@gillamsmithlaw.com David Folsom ( ) Jackson Walker L.L.P Summerfield Dr., Suite B Texarkana, TX Telephone: (903) Facsimile: (903) dfolsom@jw.com ATTORNEYS FOR INTERVENOR INTEL CORPORATION /s/ Frank V. Pietrantonio Deron R. Dacus Texas Bar No THE DACUS FIRM, P.C. 821 ESE Loop 323, Suite 430 Tyler, TX Tel: (903) Fax: (903) ddacus@dacusfirm.com Jonathan G. Graves (VA Bar 46136) Frank V. Pietrantonio (VA Bar 25473) Stephen C. Crenshaw (VA Bar 82016) COOLEY LLP One Freedom Square Reston Town Center Freedom Drive Reston, VA Telephone: (703) Fax: (703) / INTEL Ex

5 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 4130 jgraves@cooley.com fpietrantonio@cooley.com screnshaw@cooley.com Phillip E. Morton (DC Bar ) COOLEY LLP 1299 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 700 Washington, DC Telephone: (202) Fax: (202) pmorton@cooley.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS TIER 3, INC., SAVVIS COMMUNICATIONS CORP., AND CENTURYLINK COMMUNICATIONS LLC /s/ Michael J. Newton Michael J. Newton (TX Bar No ) Brady Cox (TX Bar No ) ALSTON & BIRD, LLP 2828 North Harwood Street, 18th Floor Dallas, Texas Tel: (214) Fax: (214) mike.newton@alston.com brady.cox@alston.com Deron R. Dacus (TX Bar No ) THE DACUS FIRM, PC 821 ESE Loop 323, Suite 430 Tyler, Texas (903) (903) Fax ddacus@dacusfirm.com Kirk T. Bradley (NC Bar No ) ALSTON & BIRD, LLP Bank of America Plaza 101 South Tryon Street, Suite 4000 Charlotte, NC Tel: (704) Fax: (704) / INTEL Ex

6 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 4131 kirk.bradley@alston.com Lindsey Yeargin (GA Bar No ) Emily Chambers Welch (GA Bar No ) ALSTON & BIRD, LLP One Atlantic Center 1201 West Peachtree St NW #4900 Atlanta, GA Tel: Fax: lindsey.yeargin@alston.com emily.welch@alston.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT DELL INC. /s/harold H. Davis, Jr. Ravi S. Deol State Bar No ravi.deol@klgates.com K&L GATES LLP 1717 Main St. Suite 2800 Dallas, Texas Facsimile Harold H. Davis, Jr., Lead Counsel California Bar No (admitted in E.D. Tex.) harold.davis@klgates.com Howard Chen Texas Bar No Rachel Burnim California Bar No (admitted in E.D. Tex.) K&L GATES LLP Four Embarcadero, Suite 1200 San Francisco, CA Telephone: Facsimile: ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS WISTRON CORP., WIWYNN CORP., AND SMS INFOCOMM CORP / INTEL Ex

7 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 134 Filed 02/21/17 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 4132 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document has been served on February 21, 2017, to all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service via the Court s CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). /s/ Antonio Sistos / INTEL Ex

8 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 23 PageID #: 4133 Jointly Claim Terms 1. fast-path processing / slow-path processing Exhibit A Alacritech s Claim s and Supporting Evidence Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence Fast-path: the protocol stack of the Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min host computer performs little or no network layer or transport layer processing Slow-path: No construction necessary 205 Patent at Abstract 205 Patent at 3: Patent at 3:63 through 4:4 205 Patent at 8: Patent at 8: Patent at 11: Patent at 15: Patent at 17: Patent at 18: Patent at 21: Patent at 24: Patent at 39: Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim File History, 4/18/2006 Amendment at ALA , ALA Patent at 39: Patent at 39: File History, 10/04/2006 Amendment at ALA Provisional at Provisional at context [for communication] data regarding an active connection 036 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim 7 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Context: the set of circumstances or / INTEL Ex

9 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 2 of 23 PageID #: 4134 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 036 Patent at 7:62 through 8:2 036 Patent at 8: Patent at 10: Patent at 15: Patent at 37:63 through 38: Patent at 39: Patent at 39: Patent at Fig Patent at Fig. 4B 072 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim File History, 03/28/2006 Amendment at ALA , ALA File History, 10/10/2006 Amendment at ALA , ALA File History, 10/04/2006 Amendment at ALA Provisional at 4-6 facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc. 1 Context: the circumstances in which an event occurs flow key an identifier for a connection 880 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim 22 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min 02/11/2011 Boucher Tr. (Patent Interference No. 105,775), 63:23-65:17. 1 Random House Webster s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999). 2 The American Heritage Dictionary, 3rd ed. (1994) / INTEL Ex

10 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 3 of 23 PageID #: 4135 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 880 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 7: Patent at 7: Patent at 11:66 through 12: Patent at 13: Patent at 18: Patent at 36: Patent at 37:66 through 38: Patent at 59: Patent at 60: Patent at 61:56 through 62:2 880 Patent at 64: File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at ALA , ALA , ALA , ALA , ALA , ALA /10/2011 Boucher Dep. Tr. 99: Key: In databases, a unique value that is used to identify a data record. Synonymous with primary key. 3 Key: In database management, an identifier for a record or group of records in a datafile. 4 Key: a group of characters that identifies a record in a database or other computer file. 5 3 Webster s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000). 4 Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 4th ed. (1999). 5 Random House Webster s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999) / INTEL Ex

11 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 4 of 23 PageID #: 4136 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 880 File History, 6/14/2010 Amendment at ALA database / flow database collection of organized data 880 Patent Claim Patent at 36: Patent at 64: File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at ALA , ALA , ALA , ALA File History, 6/14/2010 Amendment at ALA Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Database: A collection of organized, related data, esp. one in electronic form that can be accessed and manipulated by specialized computer software. 6 Database: A collection of related information about a subject organized in a useful manner that provides a base or foundation for procedures, such as retrieving information, drawing conclusions, and making decisions. Any collection of information that servers these purposes qualifies as a database, even if the information isn t stored on a computer. In fact, important predecessors of today s sophisticated business database systems were files kept on index cards and stored in file cabinets. Information usually is divided into data records, each with one or more data fields. 7 6 Random House Webster s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999). 7 Webster s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000) / INTEL Ex

12 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 5 of 23 PageID #: 4137 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 5. a destination [] in the memory of the computer / a destination memory; / a destination in memory; / a destination... on the host computer system a single contiguous block or several associated blocks of memory in the computer 699 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at Abstract 699 Patent at 2: Patent at 2:67 through 3: Patent at 5:36 through 6:8 699 Patent at 6:60-7:2 699 Patent at Figs. 2 and Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 43: Provisional at 1-3 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Destination: 1. the place to which a person or thing travels or is sent. 2. The purpose for which something is destined. 8 Destination: The record, file, document, or disk to which information is copied or moved, as opposed to the source. 9 Destination: The location (drive, folder, or directory) to which a file is copied or moved. Compare source (definition 1) Random House Webster s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999) 9 Webster s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000) 10 Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 4th ed. (1999) / INTEL Ex

13 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 6 of 23 PageID #: 4138 Terms By Plaintiff Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 6. operation code status data 880 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 7: Patent at 53:63 through 54:6 880 Patent at 63:28 through 64: Patent File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at ALA , ALA , ALA , ALA , ALA Patent File History, 6/14/2010 Amendment at ALA , ALA Patent File History, 11/1/2010 Amendment at ALA , ALA Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Word: The native unit of storage on a particular machine. A word is the largest amount of data that can be handled by the microprocessor in one operation and is also, as a rule, the width of the main data bus. Word sizes of 16 bits and 32 bits are the most common. 11 Word: A unit of information composed of characters, bits, or bytes that s treated as an entity and that can be stored in one location Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 4th ed. (1999). 12 Webster s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000) / INTEL Ex

14 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 7 of 23 PageID #: 4139 Terms By Defendants Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 7. prepending / No construction necessary 036 Patent Claim 4 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min prepended 072 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 14: Patent at 4: Patent at 4: Patent at 4: Patent at 8: Patent at 11: Patent at 11: Patent at 29: Patent at 39: Patent at Fig File History, 4/19/2007 Amendment at ALA , ALA status information No construction necessary 072 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim 15 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min / INTEL Ex

15 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 8 of 23 PageID #: 4140 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 072 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 11: Patent at 13:51 through 14: Patent at 27: Patent at 30: Patent at 63: Patent at 64: substantially no network layer or transport layer processing / significant network layer or significant transport layer processing No construction necessary 205 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at Abstract 205 Patent at 4: Patent at 39: Patent at 43:13-17 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min 10. substantially contiguous manner No construction necessary 205 Patent Claim Patent at 42:30-47 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min 11. without an interrupt dividing No construction necessary Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim 22 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Interrupt: A hardware or software signal that temporarily stops program execution in a computer so that 13 Should Defendants seek unnecessary judicial review of the term, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely on the provided extrinsic evidence / INTEL Ex

16 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 9 of 23 PageID #: 4141 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 241 Patent at 4: Patent at 5: Patent at 11: Patent at 14: Patent at 14:64 through 16:1 241 Patent at 16: Patent at 34:60 through 35:1 241 Patent at 36: Patent at 37: Patent at 41:27-40 another procedure can be carried out. 14 Interrupt: A signal to the microprocessor indicating that an event has occurred that requires its attention. Processing is halted momentarily so that input/output or other operations can take place. When the operation is finished, processing resumes. 15 Interrupt: A signal from a device to a computer s processor requesting attention from the processor. When the processor receives an interrupt, it suspends its current operations, saves the status of its work, and transfers control to a special routine known as an interrupt handler, which contains the instructions for dealing with the particular situation that caused the interrupt. Interrupts can be generated by various hardware devices to request service or report problems, or by the processor itself in response to program errors or requests for operating-system services. Interrupts 14 Random House Webster s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999) 15 Webster s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000) / INTEL Ex

17 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 10 of 23 PageID #: 4142 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence are the processor s way of communicating with the other elements that make up a computer system. A hierarchy of interrupt priorities determines which interrupt request will be handled first if more than one request is made. A program can temporarily disable some interrupts if it needs the full attention of the processor to complete a particular task re-assembly buffer No construction necessary 880 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 22:57 through 23:4 880 Patent at 29:35-48 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min 13. Flow re-assembler No construction necessary. 880 Patent Claim Patent at 11:66 through 12: Patent at 13: Patent at 13: Patent at 13: Patent at 14: Patent at 18: Patent at 33:64-34:9 880 File History, 11/1/2010 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min 16 Microsoft Computer Dictionary, 4th ed. (1999) / INTEL Ex

18 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 11 of 23 PageID #: 4143 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence Amendment at ALA File History, 6/14/2010 at ALA File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at ALA , ALA packet batching module No construction necessary. 880 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 64: Patent at Fig Patent at 5: Patent at 36: Patent at 37:66 through 38: Patent at 59: Patent at 60: Patent at 61:56 through 62:2 880 File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at ALA Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min 15. traffic classifier No construction necessary Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 59: Patent at 63: File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Traffic: The messages sent and received over a communication channel Should Defendants seek unnecessary judicial review of the term, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely on the provided extrinsic evidence. 18 Modern Dictionary of Electronics, 6th ed. (1997) / INTEL Ex

19 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 12 of 23 PageID #: 4144 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence ALA File History, 11/1/2010 Amendment at ALA Traffic: Bellcore s definition: A flow of attempts, calls, and messages. My definition: The amount of activity during a given period of time over a circuit, line or group of lines, or the number of messages handled by a communications switch. There are many measures of traffic. Typically it s so many minutes of voice conversation, or so many bits of data conversation. Note that Bellcore includes attempts in its definition of traffic. I don't. The decision is yours. But you should be aware of what you include in your calculations. 19 Traffic: Messages that are transmitted and received over a communication channel. 20 Prioritization of Network Traffic Prioritization can be explained as follows: implement some method to get important packets through a network when the network is congested and delay unimportant packets until later. Important packets 19 Newton s Telecom Dictionary, 16th ed. (2000). 20 IEEE Standard Glossary of Computer Networking Terminology (1995) / INTEL Ex

20 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 13 of 23 PageID #: 4145 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence are generally classified as delaysensitive traffic such as that generated by live videoconferencing, voice calls, mission-critical transaction processing, remote monitoring, and collaborative computing (in which people work in real time on their computer screens across networks). Unimportant packets may include packets carrying electronic mail or packets downloaded from Internet Web sites by freeloading users. 21 See also Gupta, Sanjay et al., Traffic classification and scheduling in ATM networks (1993). See also Kubbar, Osama et al., Traffic Classification and Resource Allocation in ATM Networks (1996) 16. flow database manager No construction necessary [beyond proposal for database ] Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 59: Patent at 59: Patent at 64:29-35 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Database: A collection of organized, related data, esp. one in electronic form that can be accessed and 21 Encyclopedia of Networking (1998). 22 Should Defendants seek unnecessary judicial review of the term, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely on the provided extrinsic evidence / INTEL Ex

21 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 14 of 23 PageID #: 4146 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 880 Patent at 68: File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at ALA manipulated by specialized computer software. 23 Database: A collection of related information about a subject organized in a useful manner that provides a base or foundation for procedures, such as retrieving information, drawing conclusions, and making decisions. Any collection of information that servers these purposes qualifies as a database, even if the information isn t stored on a computer. In fact, important predecessors of today s sophisticated business database systems were files kept on index cards and stored in file cabinets. Information usually is divided into data records, each with one or more data fields. 24 Database management: Tasks related to creating, maintaining, organizing, and retrieving information from a database. See data manipulation Random House Webster s College Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1999). 24 Webster s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000). 25 Webster s New World Dictionary of Computer Terms, 8th ed. (2000) / INTEL Ex

22 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 15 of 23 PageID #: 4147 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 17. flow manager No construction necessary Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 11:66 through 12: Patent at 18: Patent at 59: Patent at 63: Patent at 87: File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at ALA , ALA , ALA Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Traffic: The messages sent and received over a communication channel. 27 Traffic: Bellcore s definition: A flow of attempts, calls, and messages. My definition: The amount of activity during a given period of time over a circuit, line or group of lines, or the number of messages handled by a communications switch. There are many measures of traffic. Typically it s so many minutes of voice conversation, or so many bits of data conversation. Note that Bellcore includes attempts in its definition of traffic. I don't. The decision is yours. But you should be aware of what you include in your calculations Should Defendants seek unnecessary judicial review of the term, Plaintiff reserves the right to rely on the provided extrinsic evidence. 27 Modern Dictionary of Electronics, 6th ed. (1997). 28 Newton s Telecom Dictionary, 16th ed. (2000) / INTEL Ex

23 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 16 of 23 PageID #: 4148 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence Traffic: Messages that are transmitted and received over a communication channel. 29 Prioritization of Network Traffic Prioritization can be explained as follows: implement some method to get important packets through a network when the network is congested and delay unimportant packets until later. Important packets are generally classified as delaysensitive traffic such as that generated by live videoconferencing, voice calls, mission-critical transaction processing, remote monitoring, and collaborative computing (in which people work in real time on their computer screens across networks). Unimportant packets may include packets carrying electronic mail or packets downloaded from Internet Web sites by freeloading users. 30 See also Gupta, Sanjay et al., Traffic classification and scheduling in ATM networks (1993). 29 IEEE Standard Glossary of Computer Networking Terminology (1995). 30 Encyclopedia of Networking (1998) / INTEL Ex

24 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 17 of 23 PageID #: 4149 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence See also Kubbar, Osama et al., Traffic Classification and Resource Allocation in ATM Networks (1996) 18. re-assembler No construction necessary. 880 Patent Claim Patent at 6:58 through 7:7 880 Patent at 13: Patent at 87: File History, 6/19/2003 Request to Provoke Interference at ALA , ALA , ALA Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min 19. means for receiving, by the network interface device from the computer, a command to transmit data from the computer to the network No construction necessary Not subject to 112(6) To the extent the Court determines otherwise, Function: Receiving a command to transmit data from the computer to the network 104 Patent Claim Patent at Fig Patent at 3: Patent at 5: Patent at 6: Patent at 38:15-26 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Structures: a network interface device, a register on the network interface device, and equivalents thereof. 20. means for sending, by the network interface No construction necessary 104 Patent Claim Patent at 3:37-44 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min / INTEL Ex

25 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 18 of 23 PageID #: 4150 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence Not subject to 112(6) 104 Patent at 5: Patent at 6: Patent at 38:15-26 device to the network, data corresponding to the command, including means for prepending a transport layer header to at least some of the data To the extent the Court determines otherwise, Function: Sending data corresponding to the command, including means for prepending a transport layer header to at least some of the data Structures: a network interface device and equivalents thereof. 21. means for sending, by the network interface device to the computer, an indication that the data has been sent from the network interface device to the network, prior to receiving, by the network interface device from the network, an acknowledgement (ACK) that the data has been received. No construction necessary Not subject to 112(6) To the extent the Court determines otherwise, Function: Sending an indication that the data has been sent from the network interface device to the network prior to receiving, by the network interface device from the network, an acknowledgment (ACK) that the data was received. 104 Patent Claim Patent at Abstract 104 Patent at 2: Patent at 4: Patent at 4: Patent at 4: Patent at 38:15-26 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min Structures: a network interface device and equivalents thereof. 22. means, coupled to Subject to 112(6) 205 Patent Claim 23 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min / INTEL Ex

26 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 19 of 23 PageID #: 4151 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 205 Patent Claim Patent at Abstract 205 Patent at Fig Patent at 4: Patent at 4: Patent at 6: Patent at 17:6-19, 205 Patent at 17: Patent at 17: Patent at 38:4 through 40: Patent at 41: Patent at 43:4-22 the host computer, for receiving from outside the apparatus a response to an ISCSI read request command and for fastpath processing a portion of the response to the ISCSI read request command, the portion including data, the portion being fastpath processed such that the data is placed into the destination memory on the host computer without the protocol stack of the host computer doing significant network layer or significant transport layer processing, the means also being for receiving a subsequent portion of the response to the ISCSI read request command and for slowpath processing the subsequent portion such that the protocol stack of the host computer does network layer and Function: receiving from outside the apparatus a response to an ISCSI read request command and for fast-path processing a portion of the response to the ISCSI read request command, the portion including data, the portion being fast-path processed such that the data is placed into the destination memory on the host computer without the protocol stack of the host computer doing significant network layer or significant transport layer processing, the means also being for receiving a subsequent portion of the response to the ISCSI read request command and for slow-path processing the subsequent portion such that the protocol stack of the host computer does network layer and transport layer processing on the subsequent portion Structure: A network interface device, a processor in a network interface device, and equivalents thereof / INTEL Ex

27 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 20 of 23 PageID #: 4152 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence transport layer processing on the subsequent portion 23. first mechanism / second mechanism No construction necessary Not subject to 112(6) To the extent the Court determines otherwise, Claim 1 Function (1: first mechanism ): processing the packets so that for each packet the network layer header and the transport layer header are validated without an interrupt dividing the processing of the network layer header and the transport layer header sending the data from each packet of the first type to a destination in memory allocated to an application without sending any of the media access control layer headers, network layer headers or transport layer headers to the destination Structures (1: first mechanism ): A network interface device, a processor in a network interface device, and equivalents thereof 241 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at 7: Patent at 8:61 through 9:5 241 Patent at 9: Patent at 9:66 through 10: Patent at 10: Patent at 11: Patent at 13: Patent at 14: Patent at 15: Patent at 15: Patent at 17: Patent at 17:37 through 18:9 241 Patent at 31: Patent at 32: Patent at 39: Patent at 40: Patent at 43: Patent at Fig. 4B 241 Patent at Fig Patent at 5: Patent at 6: Patent at 39: Patent at 41: Patent at Fig Patent at Fig. 6 Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min / INTEL Ex

28 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 21 of 23 PageID #: 4153 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence 036 Patent at Fig. 9 3 & 4: Function (Claim 3: second mechanism ): processing an upper layer header of at least one of the packets thereby determining the destination, wherein the upper layer header corresponds to a protocol layer above the transport layer. Function (Claim 4: second mechanism ): processing an upper layer header of at least one of the packets of the second type thereby determining the destination Structure(s) ( 3 & 4: second mechanism ): a host CPU operating a TCP protocol stack, as detailed in, e.g., 241 Patent, 9:66 to 10:23, 40:22-42, 43:9-35, Fig. 4B, and equivalents thereto. Claim 5 Function (Claim 5: second mechanism ): processing a transport layer header of another packet prior to receiving the plurality of packets from the network, thereby establishing a Transmission Control Protocol / INTEL Ex

29 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 22 of 23 PageID #: 4154 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence (TCP) connection for the packets of the first type. Structure(s) (Claim 5: second mechanism ): a host CPU operating a TCP protocol stack, as detailed in, e.g., 241 patent, 9:34-48, 9:66 to 10:23, 39:32-45, 43:9-35, Fig. 4B, and equivalents thereto Claim 17 Function (17: first mechanism ): providing a block of data and a Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) connection Structures (17: first mechanism ): a host CPU operating a TCP protocol stack, as detailed in, e.g., 241 patent, 7:42-58; 17:20-36; Fig. 11; and equivalents thereof. Function (17: second mechanism ): dividing the block of data into multiple segments; prepending an outbound packet header to each of the segments, thereby forming an outbound packet corresponding to each segment, the outbound packet header containing an outbound media / INTEL Ex

30 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 23 of 23 PageID #: 4155 Claim Term (s) Intrinsic Evidence Extrinsic Evidence access control layer header, an outbound Internet Protocol (IP) header and an outbound TCP header, wherein the prepending of each outbound packet header occurs without an interrupt dividing the prepending of the outbound media access control layer header, the outbound (IP) header and the outbound TCP header. Structures (17: second mechanism ): A network interface device, a processor in the network interface device, and equivalents thereof 24. second apparatus[es] No construction necessary Not subject to 112(6). 036 Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent Claim Patent at Abstract 036 Patent at 7: Patent at 8: Patent at 15: Patent at 15: Expert testimony of Dr. Paul Min / INTEL Ex

31 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 100 PageID #: 4156 Defendants and Intervenors s and Supporting Evidence prepending / prepended 036: 4 072: 1, 9, : 1, : 7, 9, 12, 15, 17, 18 adding to the front / added to the front [Alacritech 1997 Prov. pp. 6, 57, ALA at ALA , 443] [Alacritech 1998 Prov. pp , ALA at ALA ] [Alacritech 2002 Prov., Specification, 60/374,788, pp. 122, 159, 338, 377, 378, 521, 562, 725, 782] [241 Patent Claim 7] [241 Patent Claim 9] [241 Patent Claim 12] [241 Patent Claim 15] [241 Patent Claim 17] [241 Patent Claim 18] [241 Patent Claim 21] [241 Patent 11:9-46] [241 Patent 12:19-50] [241 Patent 13:48-14:33] [241 Patent 16:9-33] [241 Patent 16:57-17:19] [241 Patent 29:42-55] [241 Patent 32:56-33:18] [241 Patent 68:48-50] [072 Patent Claim 1] [072 Patent Claim 9] 1 To the extent that the cited Supporting Evidence includes references to other portions of specifications, figures, or other documents, they are expressly incorporated. To the extent that the testimony of Mark Lanning is cited as Supporting Evidence, all references or citations included in the Declarations of Mr. Mark Lanning regarding claim construction in this case are expressly incorporated. 1 INTEL Ex

32 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 2 of 100 PageID #: 4157 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [072 Patent Claim 15] [072 Patent 11:18-54] [072 Patent 12:26-57] [072 Patent 13:52-14:36] [072 Patent 16:10-34] [072 Patent 16:57-17:18] [072 Patent 29:33-45] [072 Patent 32:41-33:2] [072 Patent 67:57-67] [104 Patent Claim 1] [104 Patent Claim 21] [104 Patent Claim 22] [104 Patent Claim 23] [036 Patent Claim 4] [036 Patent Claim 21] [036 Patent 11:20-57] [036 Patent 12:30-61] [036 Patent 13:59-14:44] [036 Patent 16:20-44] [036 Patent 17:1-30] [036 Patent 29:52-64] [036 Patent 32:65-33:27] [036 Patent 68:40-52] fast-path processed / fast-path processing 205: 1, 8, 31 a mode of operation in which the network interface device performs all physical layer, [Alacritech 1997 Prov. pp. 6, 7, 10-14, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25-28, 30, 35, 39-45, 53, 55, 57, ALA at ALA , 393, , 401, 404, 407, 410, , 416, 421, , 439, 441, 443] [205 Patent Claim 1] [205 Patent Claim 8] [205 Patent Claim 14] 2 INTEL Ex

33 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 3 of 100 PageID #: 4158 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence MAC layer, IP layer, and TCP layer processing [205 Patent Claim 17] [205 Patent Claim 31] [205 Patent 1:37-56] [205 Patent 2:19-31] [205 Patent 3:40-59] [205 Patent 3:60-4:6] [205 Patent 4:23-39] [205 Patent 4:40-64] [205 Patent 5:40-42] [205 Patent 6:14-17] [205 Patent 8:8-24] [205 Patent 8:25-40] [205 Patent 8:41-60] [205 Patent 9:17-29] [205 Patent 10:26-38] [205 Patent 10:39-57] [205 Patent 10:58-11:17] [205 Patent 11:18-31] [205 Patent 11:53-12:3] [205 Patent 12:4-24] [205 Patent 12:59-13:13] [205 Patent 13:14-42] [205 Patent 14:21-49] [205 Patent 15:51-16:9] [205 Patent 16:24-52] [205 Patent 16:53-17:5] [205 Patent 17:6-18] [205 Patent 17:19-34] [205 Patent 17:35-49] [205 Patent 18:1-15] 3 INTEL Ex

34 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 4 of 100 PageID #: 4159 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence slow path processing 205: 8, 31 a mode of operation in which the host performs at least some of the physical layer, MAC layer, IP layer, or TCP [205 Patent 18:16-37] [205 Patent 18:38-56] [205 Patent 18:57-19:10] [205 Patent 19:11-31] [205 Patent 20:61-21:12] [205 Patent 21:13-26] [205 Patent 22:43-56] [205 Patent 35:27-44] [205 Patent 36:8-21] [205 Patent 36:22-43] [205 Patent 36:44-49] [205 Patent 36:50-37:7] [205 Patent 37:8-18] [205 Patent 37:19-61] [205 Patent 39:30-45] [205 Patent 39:46-62] [205 Patent 39:63-40:11] [205 Patent 40:36-63] [205 Patent 41:23-35] [205 Patent 42:11-16] [205 Patent 42:48-60] [205 Patent 43:4-28] [Alacritech 1997 Prov. pp. 6, 7, 10-14, 15, 18, 21, 24, 25-28, 30, 35, 39-45, 53, 55, ALA at ALA , 393, , 401, 404, 407, 410, , 416, 421, , 439, 441] [205 Patent Claim 8] [205 Patent Claim 14] [205 Patent Claim 31] [205 Patent Claim 34] [205 Patent 2:52-3:13] 4 INTEL Ex

35 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 5 of 100 PageID #: 4160 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence a destination [] in the [a] memory of the computer 699: 1, 2, 7, 13, 20 a destination memory 205: 1, 8, 22, 31, 36 layer processing [205 Patent 4:23-39] [205 Patent 4:40-64] [205 Patent 5:40-42] [205 Patent 6:14-17] [205 Patent 8:25-40] [205 Patent 11:53-12:3] [205 Patent 14:21-49] [205 Patent 17:6-18] [205 Patent 17:19-34] [205 Patent 18:16-37] [205 Patent 18:57-19:10] [205 Patent 28:63-29:17] [205 Patent 30:43-31:5] [205 Patent 36:8-21] [205 Patent 36:44-49] [205 Patent 36:50-37:7] [205 Patent 39:30-45] [205 Patent 40:36-63] [205 Patent 40:64-41:22] [205 Patent 41:23-35] the location in host memory where data resides when all MAC layer, network layer, and transport layer processing is complete ALA [Alacritech 1997 Prov. pp. 1-3, 6-16, ALA at ALA , ] [880 File History, ALA at ALA ] [241 Patent Claim 1] [241 Patent Claim 3] [241 Patent Claim 4] [241 Patent Claim 5] [241 Patent Claim 7] [241 Patent Claim 9] [241 Patent Claim 11] 5 INTEL Ex

36 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 6 of 100 PageID #: 4161 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence a destination in memory 241: 1, 22 a destination...on the host computer system 880: 5 [241 Patent Claim 16] [241 Patent Claim 18] [241 Patent Claim 22] [241 Patent Claim 23] [241 Patent Claim 24] [241 Patent 1:50-2:18] [241 Patent 2:27-44] [241 Patent 2:61-3:10] [241 Patent 3:27-49] [241 Patent 3:50-65] [241 Patent 3:66-4:19] [241 Patent 4:20-33] [241 Patent 5:18-38] [241 Patent 5:39-60] [241 Patent 6:6-9] [241 Patent 7:17-19] [241 Patent 7:42-58] [241 Patent 7:59-8:4] [241 Patent 8:39-60] [241 Patent 9:17-33] [241 Patent 9:49-65] [241 Patent 9:66-10:23] [241 Patent 10:24-40] [241 Patent 11:9-46] [241 Patent 11:47-62] [241 Patent 12:51-13:7] [241 Patent 13:8-33] [241 Patent 13:34-47] [241 Patent 13:48-14:33] [241 Patent 14:48-64] 6 INTEL Ex

37 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 7 of 100 PageID #: 4162 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [241 Patent 14:65-15:16] [241 Patent 15:17-30] [241 Patent 15:31-56] [241 Patent 15:57-16:8] [241 Patent 16:9-33] [241 Patent 16:34-56] [241 Patent 16:57-17:19] [241 Patent 17:20-36] [241 Patent 18:10-27] [241 Patent 18:39-64] [241 Patent 18:65-19:30] [241 Patent 19:61-20:8] [241 Patent 20:20-60] [241 Patent 21:12-30] [241 Patent 21:65-22:27] [241 Patent 23:46-24:3] [241 Patent 26:24-49] [241 Patent 27:2-31] [241 Patent 27:32-47] [241 Patent 30:40-53] [241 Patent 30:54-31:8] [241 Patent 31:14-39] [241 Patent 31:40-50] [241 Patent 31:51-32:26] [241 Patent 32:27-35] [241 Patent 33:19-29] [241 Patent 34:14-59] [241 Patent 35:20-46] [241 Patent 35:64-36:11] [241 Patent 36:40-47] 7 INTEL Ex

38 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 8 of 100 PageID #: 4163 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [241 Patent 37:23-25] [241 Patent 37:26-30] [241 Patent 37:38-38] [241 Patent 37:50-50] [241 Patent 37:51-65] [241 Patent 38:7-24] [241 Patent 38:25-38] [241 Patent 38:41-45] [241 Patent 38:54-62] [241 Patent 39:21-31] [241 Patent 39:52-67] [241 Patent 40:15-15] [241 Patent 40:16-21] [241 Patent 40:23-35] [241 Patent 40:36-42] [241 Patent 40:43-56] [241 Patent 40:57-41:3] [241 Patent 41:42-42] [241 Patent 41:43-51] [241 Patent 42:27-27] [241 Patent 42:28-47] [241 Patent 43:10-36] [241 Patent 43:37-40] [241 Patent 44:8-18] [241 Patent 44:33-55] [241 Patent 47:41-50] [241 Patent 48:10-12] [241 Patent 48:20-24] [241 Patent 48:29-38] [241 Patent 50:4-14] 8 INTEL Ex

39 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 9 of 100 PageID #: 4164 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [241 Patent 50:28-35] [241 Patent 50:38-38] [241 Patent 52:18-26] [241 Patent 53:8-13] [241 Patent 54:23-29] [241 Patent 55:4-6] [241 Patent 56:4-4] [241 Patent 56:5-9] [241 Patent 56:10-10] [241 Patent 56:11-37] [241 Patent 56:42-48] [241 Patent 56:61-62] [241 Patent 56:64-57:7] [241 Patent 57:8-15] [241 Patent 57:28-45] [241 Patent 57:57-60] [241 Patent 58:12-17] [241 Patent 58:62-59:4] [241 Patent 60:12-22] [241 Patent 60:33-42] [241 Patent 60:43-47] [241 Patent 60:54-61:2] [241 Patent 61:3-16] [241 Patent 61:18-34] [241 Patent 61:36-51] [241 Patent 61:53-62] [241 Patent 62:22-25] [241 Patent 62:42-45] [241 Patent 62:47-57] [241 Patent 62:59-63:7] 9 INTEL Ex

40 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 10 of 100 PageID #: 4165 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [241 Patent 63:18-35] [241 Patent 63:63-65] [241 Patent 64:2-5] [241 Patent 64:7-16] [241 Patent 64:17-36] [241 Patent 64:47-62] [241 Patent 65:19-45] [241 Patent 66:6-10] [241 Patent 66:23-43] [241 Patent 67:41-52] [241 Patent 67:61-68:15] [241 Patent 68:17-46] [241 Patent 68:48-50] [241 Patent 70:17-21] [241 Patent 71:30-41] [241 Patent 72:32-54] [241 Patent 72:64-73:13] [241 Patent 73:14-23] [241 Patent 73:28-34] [241 Patent 75:1-15] [241 Patent 76:16-19] [241 Patent 77:54-61] [241 Patent 78:21-28] [241 Patent 78:29-30] [241 Patent 78:55-58] [241 Patent 79:60-65] [241 Patent 79:66-80:3] [241 Patent 80:4-5] [241 Patent 84:53-85:52] [241 Patent 85:62-86:2] 10 INTEL Ex

41 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 11 of 100 PageID #: 4166 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [241 Patent 86:8-16] [241 Patent 86:17-30] [241 Patent 86:31-36] [241 Patent 86:37-56] [241 Patent 87:32-37] [241 Patent 88:56-62] [241 Patent 95:15-37] [241 Patent 96:23-34] [241 Patent 97:50-65] [241 Patent 97:66-67] [241 Patent 98:6-30] [205 Patent Claim 1] [205 Patent Claim 2] [205 Patent Claim 5] [205 Patent Claim 6] [205 Patent Claim 7] [205 Patent Claim 8] [205 Patent Claim 11] [205 Patent Claim 12] [205 Patent Claim 15] [205 Patent Claim 20] [205 Patent Claim 22] [205 Patent Claim 23] [205 Patent Claim 24] [205 Patent Claim 26] [205 Patent Claim 28] [205 Patent Claim 29] [205 Patent Claim 31] [205 Patent Claim 32] [205 Patent Claim 33] 11 INTEL Ex

42 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 12 of 100 PageID #: 4167 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [205 Patent Claim 35] [205 Patent Claim 36] [205 Patent 1:37-56] [205 Patent 4:23-39] [205 Patent 4:40-64] [205 Patent 4:65-67] [205 Patent 6:12-13] [205 Patent 6:25-42] [205 Patent 8:8-24] [205 Patent 8:41-60] [205 Patent 8:61-9:16] [205 Patent 9:17-29] [205 Patent 9:30-48] [205 Patent 10:39-57] [205 Patent 10:58-11:17] [205 Patent 11:18-31] [205 Patent 12:25-58] [205 Patent 13:14-42] [205 Patent 13:43-57] [205 Patent 14:8-20] [205 Patent 14:21-49] [205 Patent 15:27-50] [205 Patent 15:51-16:9] [205 Patent 16:10-23] [205 Patent 16:53-17:5] [205 Patent 17:19-34] [205 Patent 17:35-49] [205 Patent 17:50-67] [205 Patent 18:16-37] [205 Patent 19:47-20:8] 12 INTEL Ex

43 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 13 of 100 PageID #: 4168 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [205 Patent 21:45-60] [205 Patent 22:13-25] [205 Patent 22:26-42] [205 Patent 22:57-23:8] [205 Patent 23:9-21] [205 Patent 24:7-26] [205 Patent 24:51-25:11] [205 Patent 25:12-42] [205 Patent 26:5-19] [205 Patent 26:31-60] [205 Patent 27:23-41] [205 Patent 28:9-38] [205 Patent 29:58-30:15] [205 Patent 32:41-59] [205 Patent 33:5-20] [205 Patent 36:8-21] [205 Patent 36:22-43] [205 Patent 36:50-37:7] [205 Patent 37:8-18] [205 Patent 37:19-61] [205 Patent 37:62-38:3] [205 Patent 38:27-38] [205 Patent 38:39-51] [205 Patent 38:65-39:11] [205 Patent 39:30-45] [205 Patent 39:46-62] [205 Patent 39:63-40:11] [205 Patent 40:12-26] [205 Patent 40:27-35] [205 Patent 40:36-63] 13 INTEL Ex

44 Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document Filed 02/21/17 Page 14 of 100 PageID #: 4169 Defendants and Intervenor s and Supporting Evidence [205 Patent 40:64-41:22] [205 Patent 41:23-35] [205 Patent 41:54-42:10] [205 Patent 42:31-47] [205 Patent 42:48-60] [205 Patent 42:61-43:3] [205 Patent 43:4-28] [880 Patent Claim 1] [880 Patent Claim 2] [880 Patent Claim 4] [880 Patent Claim 5] [880 Patent Claim 6] [880 Patent Claim 7] [880 Patent Claim 13] [880 Patent Claim 14] [880 Patent Claim 15] [880 Patent Claim 18] [880 Patent Claim 24] [880 Patent Claim 31] [880 Patent Claim 32] [880 Patent Claim 41] [880 Patent Claim 42] [880 Patent Claim 43] [880 Patent Claim 45] [880 Patent Claim 46] [880 Patent Claim 48] [880 Patent Claim 52] [880 Patent Claim 53] [880 Patent Claim 55] [880 Patent Claim 56] 14 INTEL Ex

LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC, Plaintiff. v. GATEWAY, INC. and Gateway Country Stores LLC; and, Microsoft Corporation; and, Dell, Inc, Defendants.

LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC, Plaintiff. v. GATEWAY, INC. and Gateway Country Stores LLC; and, Microsoft Corporation; and, Dell, Inc, Defendants. United States District Court, S.D. California. LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC, Plaintiff. v. GATEWAY, INC. and Gateway Country Stores LLC; and, Microsoft Corporation; and, Dell, Inc, Defendants. Civil No. 02CV2060-B(WMc),

More information

Case 1:13-cv ML Document 194 Filed 02/06/15 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:13-cv ML Document 194 Filed 02/06/15 Page 1 of 6 Case 1:13-cv-01036-ML Document 194 Filed 02/06/15 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION Civil Action No: 1:13-cv-1036 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE

More information

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Case No.

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE. Case No. Case 1:16-cv-00212-UNA Document 1 Filed 03/31/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE JSDQ MESH TECHNOLOGIES LLC, Plaintiff, Case No.: v. JURY TRIAL

More information

Case 2:08-cv DF-CE Document 1 Filed 07/29/08 Page 1 of 12

Case 2:08-cv DF-CE Document 1 Filed 07/29/08 Page 1 of 12 Case 2:08-cv-00294-DF-CE Document 1 Filed 07/29/08 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION LEON STAMBLER, v. Plaintiff, JPMORGAN CHASE & CO.;

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION Case 1:16-cr-00051-TWT-JSA Document 7 Filed 02/18/16 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) ) Criminal No.

More information

Case3:12-cv VC Document96 Filed09/14/15 Page1 of 10

Case3:12-cv VC Document96 Filed09/14/15 Page1 of 10 Case:-cv-0-VC Document Filed0// Page of (Counsel listed on signature page) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION LLC, et al., v. Plaintiffs, HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Petitioner. CHANBOND LLC Patent Owner

IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Petitioner. CHANBOND LLC Patent Owner IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Petitioner v. CHANBOND LLC Patent Owner Patent No. 7,941,822 B2 PETITIONER S RESPONSE TO PO

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION AZURE NETWORKS, LLC and TRI-COUNTY EXCELSIOR FOUNDATION, v. Plaintiffs, TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC., FREESCALE SEMICONDUCTOR,

More information

March 13, Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-853

March 13, Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-853 James C. Otteson jim@agilityiplaw.com Bus: 650-227-4800 Fax: 650-318-3483 March 13, 2013 Lisa R. Barton Acting Secretary 500 E Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20436 Re: Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Civil Action No. v. ) ) AMAZON.COM, INC., a/k/a ) AMAZON.COM AUCTIONS, INC. ) ) Defend ant.

More information

Case 5:17-cv Document 1 Filed 11/06/17 Page 1 of 19

Case 5:17-cv Document 1 Filed 11/06/17 Page 1 of 19 Case :-cv-0 Document Filed /0/ Page of 0 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Claude M. Stern (Bar No. ) claudestern@quinnemanuel.com Twin Dolphin Dr., th Floor Redwood Shores, CA 0 Phone: (0) 0-000

More information

Case 3:07-cr KC Document 574 Filed 01/12/11 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. Case No.

Case 3:07-cr KC Document 574 Filed 01/12/11 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. Case No. Case 3:07-cr-00087-KC Document 574 Filed 01/12/11 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LUIS POSADA CARRILES, Defendant.

More information

Case5:13-cv HRL Document15 Filed01/22/13 Page1 of 8

Case5:13-cv HRL Document15 Filed01/22/13 Page1 of 8 Case:-cv-0-HRL Document Filed0// Page of John J. Edmonds (State Bar No. 00) jedmonds@cepiplaw.com COLLINS, EDMONDS, POGORZELSKI, SCHLATHER & TOWER, PLLC East First Street, Suite 00 Santa Ana, California

More information

mew Doc 867 Filed 07/11/17 Entered 07/11/17 15:53:25 Main Document Pg 1 of 3

mew Doc 867 Filed 07/11/17 Entered 07/11/17 15:53:25 Main Document Pg 1 of 3 17-10751-mew Doc 867 Filed 07/11/17 Entered 07/11/17 15:53:25 Main Document Pg 1 of 3 GIBBONS P.C. One Pennsylvania Plaza, 37 th Floor New York, New York 10119-3701 Telephone: (212) 613-2000 Facsimile:

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Cross-Complainant Western National Construction ("Western") in this action.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA. Cross-Complainant Western National Construction (Western) in this action. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 GREEN & HALL, A Professional Corporation MICHAEL J. PEPEK, State Bar No. 178238 mpepek@greenhall.com SAMUEL M. DANSKIN, State Bar No. 136044 sdanskin@greenhall.com MICHAEL A. ERLINGER,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case Case 1:08-cv-00605-LJO-GSA 1:07-cv-01347-LJO-GSA Document 3561 Filed 01/27/2009 01/27/09 Page Page 1 of 14 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Todd M. Schneider

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiffs, Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiffs, Defendant. 1 1 WI-LAN USA, INC. and WI-LAN, INC., vs. APPLE INC., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiffs, Defendant. AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS. CASE NO. 1cv0 DMS (BLM) ORDER CONSTRUING

More information

Case 5:07-cv D Document 1 Filed 06/06/07 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Case 5:07-cv D Document 1 Filed 06/06/07 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA Case 5:07-cv-00650-D Document 1 Filed 06/06/07 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA 1) RONALD A. KATZ TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, L.P., Plaintiff, v. Case No.

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit CORE WIRELESS LICENSING S.A.R.L., Plaintiff-Appellant v. APPLE INC., Defendant-Appellee 2015-2037 Appeal from the United States District Court for

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION RADIO TOWER NETWORKS, LLC, Plaintiff, Case No: vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CROSSPOINT COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Defendant.

More information

U. S. District Court Eastern District of Louisiana (New Orleans) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11-cv CJB-ALC

U. S. District Court Eastern District of Louisiana (New Orleans) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11-cv CJB-ALC US District Court Civil Docket as of 5/19/2011 Retrieved from the court on July 21, 2011 U. S. District Court Eastern District of Louisiana (New Orleans) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11-cv-00256-CJB-ALC

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-1877

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-1877 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION LAKESOUTH HOLDINGS, LLC, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 3:14-cv-1877 v. Demand for Jury Trial WAL-MART STORES, INC. and

More information

mew Doc 2823 Filed 03/13/18 Entered 03/13/18 15:59:56 Main Document Pg 1 of 6

mew Doc 2823 Filed 03/13/18 Entered 03/13/18 15:59:56 Main Document Pg 1 of 6 Pg 1 of 6 Marshall C. Turner 1900 Carondelet Plaza, Suite 600 St. Louis, MO 63105 Telephone: 314.480.1500 Facsimile: 314.480.1505 email: marshall.turner@huschblackwell.com John J. Cruciani 4801 Main Street,

More information

Case5:11-cv LHK Document1082 Filed05/08/15 Page1 of 5

Case5:11-cv LHK Document1082 Filed05/08/15 Page1 of 5 Case:-cv-00-LHK Document Filed0/0/ Page of Richard M. Heimann (State Bar No. 0) Kelly M. Dermody (State Bar No. ) Brendan P. Glackin (State Bar No. ) Dean M. Harvey (State Bar No. 0) Anne B. Shaver (State

More information

John Allcock, DLA Piper US, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendants.

John Allcock, DLA Piper US, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendants. United States District Court, S.D. California. HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P, Plaintiff. v. GATEWAY, INC, Defendant. Gateway, Inc, Counterclaim-Plaintiff. v. Hewlett-Packard Development Company,

More information

September 21, Docket No. ER

September 21, Docket No. ER California Independent System Operator Corporation September 21, 2017 The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, NE Washington, DC 20426 Re: California

More information

Case 3:14-cv PK Document 53 Filed 04/23/15 Page 1 of 7

Case 3:14-cv PK Document 53 Filed 04/23/15 Page 1 of 7 Case 3:14-cv-01528-PK Document 53 Filed 04/23/15 Page 1 of 7 Victor J. Kisch, OSB No. 941038 vjkisch@stoel.com Todd A. Hanchett, OSB No. 992787 tahanchett@stoel.com John B. Dudrey, OSB No. 083085 jbdudrey@stoel.com

More information

THIRTEENTH MONTHLY FEE AND EXPENSE STATEMENT OF MICHELMAN & ROBINSON LLP, SPECIAL COUNSEL TO LLOYD T. WHITAKER, LIQUIDATING TRUSTEE

THIRTEENTH MONTHLY FEE AND EXPENSE STATEMENT OF MICHELMAN & ROBINSON LLP, SPECIAL COUNSEL TO LLOYD T. WHITAKER, LIQUIDATING TRUSTEE FF?H r 7f John A. Sebastinelli MICHELMAN & ROBINSON LLP 455 Market Street, Suite 1420 San Francisco, California 94105 telephone: ( 415 882-7770 email: jsebastinelli@mrllp.com Special Counsel to Lloyd T.

More information

Counsel for Lead Plaintiff Robert Knollenberg. Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs. [Additional counsel appear on signature page.]

Counsel for Lead Plaintiff Robert Knollenberg. Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs. [Additional counsel appear on signature page.] 1 1 1 1 1 1 SHAWN A. WILLIAMS ( JASON C. DAVIS (pro hac vice 0 Pine Street, Suite 00 San Francisco, CA 1 Telephone: 1/- 1/- (fax shawnw@lerachlaw.com jdavis@lerachlaw.com BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE STEPHEN

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/22/ :14 PM INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 180 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2015

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/22/ :14 PM INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 180 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2015 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/22/2015 0614 PM INDEX NO. 653123/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 180 RECEIVED NYSCEF 05/22/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK PHOENIX LIGHT SF LIMITED, BLUE

More information

Case 1:18-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 10/17/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DELAWARE

Case 1:18-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 10/17/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DELAWARE Case 1:18-cv-01604-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/17/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DELAWARE MAGNACHARGE LLC v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. SONY ELECTRONICS, INC., and

More information

Paper Entered: April 1, 2016 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

Paper Entered: April 1, 2016 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Trials@uspto.gov Paper 24 571 272 7822 Entered: April 1, 2016 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD UBISOFT, INC. and UBISOFT ENTERTAINMENT SA, Petitioner,

More information

Case Document 326 Filed in TXSB on 04/03/17 Page 1 of 5

Case Document 326 Filed in TXSB on 04/03/17 Page 1 of 5 Case 17-30262 Document 326 Filed in TXSB on 04/03/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION In re: Chapter 11 MEMORIAL PRODUCTION Case No.

More information

Case 4:14-cv BRW Document 58 Filed 12/04/15 Page 1 of 13

Case 4:14-cv BRW Document 58 Filed 12/04/15 Page 1 of 13 Case 4:14-cv-00368-BRW Document 58 Filed 12/04/15 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION COOLING & APPLIED TECHNOLOGY, INC. PLAINTIFF V.

More information

Case 1:14-cv AJS Document 1 Filed 08/21/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 1:14-cv AJS Document 1 Filed 08/21/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Case 1:14-cv-00220-AJS Document 1 Filed 08/21/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I LLC and INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC v.

More information

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed 09/27/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed 09/27/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 Case 4:16-cv-00746 Document 1 Filed 09/27/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION Neal Technologies, Inc. d/b/a Bullet Proof Diesel

More information

Expert Witness Committee Bar Year 2015/2016

Expert Witness Committee Bar Year 2015/2016 Expert Witness Committee Bar Year 2015/2016 CO-CHAIRS Darren M. VanPuymbrouck FREEBORN & PETERS LLP 311 South Wacker Drive Suite 3000 Phone: (312) 360-6788 Fax: (312) 360- dvanpuymbrouck@freeborn.com Matthew

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION CARUCEL INVESTMENTS, L.P., vs. Plaintiff, VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., d/b/a AUDI OF AMERICA, INC., Defendant.

More information

mew Doc 766 Filed 06/23/17 Entered 06/23/17 16:16:24 Main Document Pg 1 of 3

mew Doc 766 Filed 06/23/17 Entered 06/23/17 16:16:24 Main Document Pg 1 of 3 17-10751-mew Doc 766 Filed 06/23/17 Entered 06/23/17 16:16:24 Main Document Pg 1 of 3 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Hearing Date and Time: July 25, 2017 @ 11:00 a.m. EST

More information

mew Doc 3067 Filed 04/12/18 Entered 04/12/18 16:16:40 Main Document Pg 1 of 4

mew Doc 3067 Filed 04/12/18 Entered 04/12/18 16:16:40 Main Document Pg 1 of 4 Pg 1 of 4 Brent C. Strickland (admitted pro hac vice) Whiteford, Taylor & Preston L.L.P. 7501 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 700w Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Telephone: (410) 347-9402 Email: bstrickland@wtplaw.com

More information

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Case 1:16-cv-01240-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/16/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE PALTALK HOLDINGS, INC., Plaintiff, v. RIOT GAMES, INC.,, Defendant.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Exhibit Z 0 0 Tyler J. Woods, Bar No. twoods@trialnewport.com NEWPORT TRIAL GROUP 00 Newport Place, Suite 00 Newport Beach, CA 0 Tel: () 0- Fax: () 0- Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-Claimant SHIPPING

More information

THIS IS AN ASBESTOS LITIGATION CASE FILED UNDER N.Y.C.A.L.

THIS IS AN ASBESTOS LITIGATION CASE FILED UNDER N.Y.C.A.L. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/10/2015 04:24 PM INDEX NO. 190036/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/10/2015 THIS IS AN ASBESTOS LITIGATION CASE FILED UNDER N.Y.C.A.L. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION RADIO TOWER NETWORKS, LLC, Plaintiff, Case No: vs. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY COMPANY, LLC, Defendant.

More information

BEFORE THE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF FULCRUM EXPLORATION, L.L.C. POOLING REPORT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE

BEFORE THE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF FULCRUM EXPLORATION, L.L.C. POOLING REPORT OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE BEFORE THE CORPORATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF O1 L E NOV 2 1 2013 APPLICANT: RELIEF SOUGHT: FULCRUM EXPLORATION, L.L.C. POOLING OURi LLLI(% ) Utt CORPORATION COw.41s OF OKLAHOMA CAUSE CD NO. CKC LEGAL

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION NEUROGRAFIX; NEUROGRAPHY INSTITUTE MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.; IMAGE-BASED SURGICENTER CORPORATION; and AARON G. FILLER, v. Plaintiffs,

More information

mew Doc 3228 Filed 05/16/18 Entered 05/16/18 15:11:48 Main Document Pg 1 of 16

mew Doc 3228 Filed 05/16/18 Entered 05/16/18 15:11:48 Main Document Pg 1 of 16 Pg 1 of 16 WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 767 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10153 Telephone (212) 310-8000 Facsimile (212) 310-8007 Gary T. Holtzer Robert J. Lemons Garrett A. Fail David N. Griffiths Attorneys

More information

Case 5:15-cv EJD Document Filed 12/17/18 Page 1 of 6

Case 5:15-cv EJD Document Filed 12/17/18 Page 1 of 6 Case :-cv-0-ejd Document - Filed // Page of 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA IN RE INTUIT DATA LITIGATION THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ALL ACTIONS Master Docket

More information

Major Judicial Precedents of Business Method-Related Inventions

Major Judicial Precedents of Business Method-Related Inventions Major Judicial Precedents of Business Method-Related Inventions In the midst of information technology development and in the wake of rulings and litigation over patents concerning business methods in

More information

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION State of California, ex rel. Bill Lockyer, Attorney General of the State of California v. Docket No. EL02-71-057 British Columbia

More information

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. Before the Honorable E. James Gildea Administrative Law Judge

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. Before the Honorable E. James Gildea Administrative Law Judge UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. Before the Honorable E. James Gildea Administrative Law Judge In the Matter of CERTAIN WIRELESS CONSUMER ELECTRONICS DEVICES AND COMPONENTS

More information

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Paper No. Date Filed: August 8, 2013 Filed on behalf of: Medtronic, Inc. By: Justin J. Oliver MEDVASCIPR@fchs.com (202) 530-1010 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL

More information

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) )

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Application Of Southern California Edison Company (U 338-E For Approval Of Its Forecast 2018 ERRA Proceeding Revenue Requirement. Application

More information

Case 5:14-cv BLF Document 265 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 3

Case 5:14-cv BLF Document 265 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 3 Case 5:14-cv-02329-BLF Document 265 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 3 1 Steve W. Berman (pro hac vice) Robert F. Lopez (pro hac vice) 2 HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1 1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300 3 I Seattle,

More information

Case Doc 279 Filed 02/18/15 Entered 02/18/15 19:55:49 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case Doc 279 Filed 02/18/15 Entered 02/18/15 19:55:49 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Document Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS IN RE: TELEXFREE, LLC, Debtors Chapter 11 Case No. 14-40987-MSH ANTHONY CELLUCCI, JAMILLY LAKE AND GERIVALDO PACHECO Putative

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ZAVALA LICENSING LLC, Plaintiff, Case No: vs. PATENT CASE KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Defendant.

More information

IN THE VANDERBURGH CIRCUIT COURT

IN THE VANDERBURGH CIRCUIT COURT Vanderburgh Circuit Court Filed: 7/25/2018 12:38 PM Clerk Vanderburgh County, Indiana STATE OF INDIANA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF VANDERBURGH ) IN THE VANDERBURGH CIRCUIT COURT EVANSVILLE WATER AND SEWER UTILITY,

More information

: : : : : : : : Index No /2013 : : : : : : : : : : Index No /2013 : : : : : : : : : : Index No /2013 : : : : : : :

: : : : : : : : Index No /2013 : : : : : : : : : : Index No /2013 : : : : : : : : : : Index No /2013 : : : : : : : SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ROYAL PARK INVESTMENTS SA/NV, Plaintiff, vs. DEUTSCHE BANK AG, et al., Defendants. ROYAL PARK INVESTMENTS SA/NV, Plaintiff, vs. CREDIT SUISSE AG,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 1 1 1 JOSHUA SONDHEIMER (SBN 0 MATTHEW EISENBRANDT (SBN The Center for Justice & Accountability 0 Market Street, Suite San Francisco, CA Tel: (1-0 Fax: (1-0 PAUL HOFFMAN (SBN 1 Schonbrun DeSimone Seplow

More information

Your SBIR Data Rights and How to Protect Them

Your SBIR Data Rights and How to Protect Them Your SBIR Data Rights and How to Protect Them Jere W. Glover Executive Director Small Business Technology Counsel Seidman & Associates, P.C. 923 15 th Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 202-662-9700 202-737-2368

More information

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION San Diego Gas & Electric Company Sellers of Energy and Ancillary Services Investigation of Practices of the California Independent

More information

Case 6:15-cv RWS-CMC Document 78 Filed 02/26/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 4503

Case 6:15-cv RWS-CMC Document 78 Filed 02/26/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 4503 Case 6:15-cv-00584-RWS-CMC Document 78 Filed 02/26/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 4503 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION BLUE SPIKE, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Case

More information

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) )

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Joint Application of Southern California Edison Company (U 338-E and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (U 902-E For Cost Recovery Of The

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION GRAFTECH INTERNATIONAL ) HOLDINGS INC., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Civil Action No. ) RESEARCH IN MOTION, LTD. and )

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Michael D. Braun ( Timothy J. Burke ( STULL STULL & BRODY 0 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 00 Los Angeles, CA 00 Telephone: ( - Facsimile: ( - [Proposed] Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Case :-cv-00-dgc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 Norman E. Siegel (admitted pro hac vice) siegel@stuevesiegel.com STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP 0 Nichols Road, Suite 0 Kansas City, Missouri Phone: () -00 Fax:

More information

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ORDER

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ORDER SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA IN THE MATTER OF THE SEARCH OF WWW.DISRUPTJ20.0RG THAT IS STORED AT PREMISES OWNED, MAINTAINED, CONTROLLED, OR OPERA TED BY DREAMHOST Special Proceedings No.

More information

Case 3:11-cv RBD-TEM Document 155 Filed 08/27/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID 3550

Case 3:11-cv RBD-TEM Document 155 Filed 08/27/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID 3550 Case 3:11-cv-00719-RBD-TEM Document 155 Filed 08/27/12 Page 1 of 11 PageID 3550 PARKERVISION, INC., THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,

More information

Case 4:10-cv YGR Document 274 Filed 12/01/16 Page 1 of 8

Case 4:10-cv YGR Document 274 Filed 12/01/16 Page 1 of 8 Case 4:10-cv-01811-YGR Document 274 Filed 12/01/16 Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Rosemary M. Rivas (SBN 209147) rrivas@finkelsteinthompson.com FINKELSTEIN THOMPSON LLP One California

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE INTELLECTUAL VENTURES II LLC, Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED CANON INC. and CANON U.S.A., INC., Defendants. COMPLAINT

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO. Plaintiffs, Defendants.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO. Plaintiffs, Defendants. 1 BERNSTEIN LIEBHARD & LIFSHITZ, LLP Sandy A. Liebhard U. Seth Ottensoser Joseph R. Seidman, Jr. East 0th Street New York, NY 0 Telephone: () - Facsimile: () - E-mail : seidman@bernlieb.com GLANCY BINKOW

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. No. SC VERIFIED MOTION FOR DAN K. WEBB TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. No. SC VERIFIED MOTION FOR DAN K. WEBB TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA No. SC03-1856 HOWARD A. ENGLE, M.D., et al., Petitioners, v. LIGGETT GROUP, INC., et al., Respondents. VERIFIED MOTION FOR DAN K. WEBB TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE Pursuant to

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION : : Plaintiff,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION : : Plaintiff, Case 107-cv-00451-SSB Doc # 1 Filed 06/08/07 Page 1 of 15 PAGEID # 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION RONALD A. KATZ TECHNOLOGY LICENSING, L.P., 9220

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT. Nature of Action

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT. Nature of Action IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ABBOTT DIABETES CARE INC., Plaintiff, v. DEXCOM, INC., Defendant. C.A. No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff Abbott Diabetes Care

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. No. SC VERIFIED MOTION FOR STUART ALTSCHULER TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. No. SC VERIFIED MOTION FOR STUART ALTSCHULER TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA No. SC03-1856 HOWARD A. ENGLE, M.D., et al., Petitioners, v. LIGGETT GROUP, INC., et al., Respondents. VERIFIED MOTION FOR STUART ALTSCHULER TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE Pursuant

More information

Attorneys for Applicant Insurance Commissioner of the State of California FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Attorneys for Applicant Insurance Commissioner of the State of California FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES G:\!GRP\!CASES\-0-0\Pleadings\Art Apps\Murals\Finals\Murals Sale Notice.doc West Fifth Street Suite 0 Los Angeles, CA 00 0 KAMALA D. HARRIS Attorney General of California FELIX LEATHERWOOD W. DEAN FREEMAN

More information

MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF LEAD PLAINTIFF S AND CERTAIN OTHER PERSONS REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES

MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF LEAD PLAINTIFF S AND CERTAIN OTHER PERSONS REQUEST FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION In re ENRON CORPORATION SECURITIES LITIGATION This Document Relates To: MARK NEWBY, et al., Individually and On Behalf of All Others

More information

Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/29/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/29/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Case 2:16-cv-01314-JRG-RSP Document 1 Filed 11/29/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION KAIST IP US LLC, Plaintiff, v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS

More information

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) )

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Application of Southern California Gas Company (U 904-G and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (U 902-G for Authority to Revise Their Natural

More information

mew Doc 3132 Filed 04/25/18 Entered 04/25/18 17:43:46 Main Document Pg 1 of 4

mew Doc 3132 Filed 04/25/18 Entered 04/25/18 17:43:46 Main Document Pg 1 of 4 Pg 1 of 4 Brent C. Strickland (admitted pro hac vice) Whiteford, Taylor & Preston L.L.P. 7501 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 700w Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Telephone: (410) 347-9402 Email: bstrickland@wtplaw.com

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1 1 GRASSMUECK GROUP Michael A. Grassmueck, Receiver P.O. Box Portland, Oregon Ph: 0.. Fax: 0..1 Email: info@grassmueckgroup.com SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, v. Plaintiff, C. WESLEY RHODES, JR.,

More information

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit EVOLUTIONARY INTELLIGENCE LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant v. SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION, SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS

More information

DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP

DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP Case3:13-cv-03287-JSW Document60 Filed11/18/13 Page1 of 3 DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Thomas R. Burke (CA State Bar No. 141930 DAVIS

More information

Paper Date Entered: December 10, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

Paper Date Entered: December 10, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Trials@uspto.gov Paper 8 571-272-7822 Date Entered: December 10, 2014 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS

More information

Case 5:14-cv BLF Document 264 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 3

Case 5:14-cv BLF Document 264 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 3 Case 5:14-cv-02329-BLF Document 264 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 3 Steve W. Berman (pro hac vice) Robert F. Lopez (pro hac vice) 2 HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1918 Eighth A venue, Suite 3300 3 Seattle,

More information

Case 2:12-cv RJS-DBP Document 184 Filed 08/26/15 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

Case 2:12-cv RJS-DBP Document 184 Filed 08/26/15 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION Case 2:12-cv-00039-RJS-DBP Document 184 Filed 08/26/15 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION NAVAJO NATION, a federally recognized Indian tribe, et al., v.

More information

March 17, Very truly yours, PLUNKETT COONEY A T T O R N E Y S & C O U N S E L O R S A T L A W

March 17, Very truly yours, PLUNKETT COONEY A T T O R N E Y S & C O U N S E L O R S A T L A W March 17, 2017 Ms. Mary Jo Kunkle Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service Commission 7109 W. Saginaw Highway Lansing, MI 48917 Re: Talk America, LLC Case No: U-18347 Dear Ms. Kunkle: Enclosed for filing

More information

ALI-ABA Audio Seminar. Bankruptcy Law As It Applies to Patent Disputes August 12, 2009 Telephone Seminar/Audio Webcast TABLE OF CONTENTS

ALI-ABA Audio Seminar. Bankruptcy Law As It Applies to Patent Disputes August 12, 2009 Telephone Seminar/Audio Webcast TABLE OF CONTENTS ALI-ABA Audio Seminar Bankruptcy Law As It Applies to Patent Disputes August 12, 2009 Telephone Seminar/Audio Webcast AGENDA FACULTY PARTICIPANTS FACULTY BIOGRAPHIES STUDY MATERIALS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION NETWORK-1 SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC., a Delaware corporation, vs. Plaintiff, Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc., a Delaware corporation;

More information

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA In the matter of the Application of Southern California Edison Company (U338-E) for Modification of Decision 05-09-018 to Extend EDR-Retention

More information

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:01-cv SAS. Parties and Attorneys

U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:01-cv SAS. Parties and Attorneys US District Court Civil Docket as of 6/28/2007 Retrieved from the court on Thursday, December 11, 2008 U.S. District Court Southern District of New York (Foley Square) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:01-cv-10629-SAS

More information

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) )

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Joint Application of Southern California Edison Company (U 338-E and San Diego Gas & Electric Company (U 902-E For Cost Recovery Of The

More information

U.S. District Court [LIVE] Western District of Texas (El Paso) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:05-cv HLH

U.S. District Court [LIVE] Western District of Texas (El Paso) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:05-cv HLH US District Court Civil Docket as of April 2, 2009 Retrieved from the court on August 11, 2009 U.S. District Court [LIVE] Western District of Texas (El Paso) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:05-cv-00431-HLH

More information

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 01/04/16 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 01/04/16 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION Case 2:16-cv-00007 Document 1 Filed 01/04/16 Page 1 of 19 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MOBILE TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, v. Plaintiff,

More information

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) MOTION FOR PARTY STATUS

BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (U 338-E) MOTION FOR PARTY STATUS BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Application of San Diego Gas & Electric Company (U 902 M for Authority, Among Other Things, to Increase Rates and Charges for Electric

More information

mew Doc 1830 Filed 11/29/17 Entered 11/29/17 12:42:39 Main Document Pg 1 of 3

mew Doc 1830 Filed 11/29/17 Entered 11/29/17 12:42:39 Main Document Pg 1 of 3 17-10751-mew Doc 1830 Filed 11/29/17 Entered 11/29/17 12:42:39 Main Document Pg 1 of 3 Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton, LLP Speights & Solomons 2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, 9 th Floor 100 Oak Street, East

More information

Case GLT Doc 1260 Filed 10/23/17 Entered 10/23/17 16:28:33 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 3

Case GLT Doc 1260 Filed 10/23/17 Entered 10/23/17 16:28:33 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 3 Case 17-22045-GLT Doc 1260 Filed 10/23/17 Entered 10/23/17 16:28:33 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA In re: ) Case No. 17-22045

More information

Case Document 653 Filed in TXSB on 03/27/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Case Document 653 Filed in TXSB on 03/27/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION Case 17-36709 Document 653 Filed in TXSB on 03/27/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION In re: Chapter 11 COBALT INTERNATIONAL ENERGY, INC., et al.,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE ORDER Case :0-cv-00-RAJ Document Filed // Page of 0 ALLVOICE DEVELOPMENTS US, LLC, v. MICROSOFT CORP., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE Plaintiff, Defendant. HONORABLE RICHARD

More information

Case 1:17-cv RGA Document 8 Filed 09/06/17 Page 1 of 90 PageID #: 546 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

Case 1:17-cv RGA Document 8 Filed 09/06/17 Page 1 of 90 PageID #: 546 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Case 1:17-cv-00952-RGA Document 8 Filed 09/06/17 Page 1 of 90 PageID #: 546 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE HERA WIRELESS S.A. and SISVEL UK LIMITED, v. ROKU, INC., Plaintiffs,

More information