Mako Surgical Gorp et al v. Stamore Implants Worldwide

Defendant: Stamore Implants Worldwide
Plaintiff: Mako Surgical Gorp and Curexo Technology Corp
Case Number: 3:2013cv01221
Filed: March 19, 2013
Court: California Northern District Court
Office: San Francisco Office
County: Santa Clara
Presiding Judge: Nathanael M. Cousins
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

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 this case: Mako Surgical Gorp et al v. Stamore Implants Worldwide
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Stamore Implants Worldwide
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mako Surgical Gorp
Represented By: Mika Mayer
Represented By: Rudolph Kim
Represented By: Laura B. Heiman
Represented By: Joshua A. Hartman
Represented By: Alexander J. Hadjis
Represented By: Johnny C. Chiu
Represented By: Walter Shih-Chun Wu
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Curexo Technology Corp
Represented By: Anne Marie Rogaski
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ 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.