In re Application of Illumina Cambridge Ltd
3:2019mc80215 |
November 7, 2019 |
US District Court for the Northern District of California |
San Francisco Office |
Other |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 83 AMENDED SUA SPONTE Judicial Referral for Purpose of Determining Relationship of Case 3:19-mc-80215 WHO with 5:20-mc-80152 NC. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 9/17/2020. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/17/2020) |
Filing 82 SUA SPONTE Judicial Referral for Purpose of Determining Relationship of Case 3:19-mc-80215 WHO with 5:20-mc-80152 NC. Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 9/10/2020. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/10/2020) |
Filing 61 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' 53 MOTION TO VACATE by Judge William H. Orrick. (jmdS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/7/2020) |
Filing 42 ORDER by Judge Thomas S. Hixson denying 17 Motion to Vacate but limiting subpoena to BGI Americas. (tshlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/19/2020) |
Filing 16 ORDER by Judge Thomas S. Hixson granting 1 Ex Parte Application for an Order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 granting leave to obtain discovery (cdnS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/7/2019) |
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: In re Application of Illumina Cambridge Ltd | |
---|---|
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.