Beacon Navigation GmbH v. Toyota Motor Corporation et al
| Beacon Navigation GmbH |
| Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor North America Inc., Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc, Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Manufacturing Alabama Inc., Toyota Motor Manufacturing Indiana Inc., Toyota Motor Manufacturing Kentucky Inc., Toyota Motor Manufacturing Mississippi Inc., Toyota Motor Manufacturing Texas Inc. and Toyota Motor Manufacturing West Virgina Inc. |
| 2:2013cv11510 |
| April 3, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Patrick J. Duggan |
| Mark A. Randon |
| Patent |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
37
ORDER denying 34 Motion to Lift Stay. Signed by District Judge Victoria A. Roberts. (CPin)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER REGARDING: (1) DISMISSAL OF SPECIFIED CLAIMS; (2) LIMITATION ON REMAINING CLAIMS; (3) LITIGATION BEFORE THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE; (4) DENIAL OF MOTIONS TO DISMISS; (5) DELAYED GRANT OF THE REQUESTS TO CONSOLIDATE; AND (6) STAY Signed by District Judge Victoria A. Roberts. (CPin)
|
|
Filing
3
MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding the Defendants' Motions to Transfer Venue. Signed by Chief Judge Gregory M. Sleet on 3/20/2013. Associated Cases: 1:11-cv-00921-GMS et al.(asw) [Transferred from ded on 4/3/2013.]
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Michigan Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
