Bridgelux, Inc. v. Cree, Inc. et al
| 3:2006cv06495 |
| October 17, 2006 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| Phyllis J. Hamilton |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 145 Patent Infringement |
| None |
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
116
STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 1/7/09. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/7/2009)
|
|
Filing
114
ORDER granting re 113 Stipulation Postponing Further Case Management Conference filed by Bridgelux, Inc. Further Case Management Conference set for 1/15/2009 02:30 PM. Joint CMC statement due 1/8/2009.. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamiltion on 12/4/08. (fj, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/5/2008)
|
|
Filing
112
STIPULATION AND ORDER POSTPONING FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE re 111 Stipulation filed by Bridgelux, Inc. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 10/23/08. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/23/2008)
|
|
Filing
110
ORDER CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Case Management Conference set for 10/30/2008 02:30 PM. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 9/12/08. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/12/2008)
|
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 California Northern 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
| Search for this case: Bridgelux, Inc. v. Cree, Inc. et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
