Dolby International AB v. Research in Motion Limited et al
Dolby Laboratories sues Blackberry smartphone maker Research in Motion ('RIM') for patent infringement, accusing it of violating its patents for spectral band replication ('SBR') and parametric stereo ('PS') audio compression technologies used in High Efficiency Advanced Audio Coding ('HE ACC') audio compression standards worldwide.
Plaintiff alleges that "unlike virtually all of its competitors, RIM refuses to 'play fair,' and has rejected numerous opportunities to license" Dolby's patented audio technologies.
| Dolby International AB |
| Research in Motion Limited and Research In Motion Corporation |
| 3:2011cv02931 |
| June 15, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| Outside US |
| William Alsup |
| Patent |
| 35:271 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 16, 2011. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement against Research In Motion Corporation, Research in Motion Limited ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 34611061054, summons issued). Filed by Dolby International AB. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Civil Cover Sheet)(wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/14/2011) |
Access additional case information on PACER
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
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.
