Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. America
| Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. |
| AU Optronics Corp. America |
| 4:2020cv06769 |
| September 29, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Donna M Ryu |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. § 271 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 15, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 REPORT on the determination of an action regarding patent infringement (cc: form mailed to register). (Attachments: #1 Dismissal)(jmlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/15/2020) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. (Glenn, Michael) (Filed on 10/14/2020) |
| Filing 7 REPORT on the filing of an action regarding Patent (cc: form mailed to register). (Attachments: #1 Complaint)(cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/1/2020) |
| Filing 6 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 12/23/2020. Initial Case Management Conference set for 12/30/2020 01:30 PM in Oakland, Courtroom 4, 3rd Floor. (cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/1/2020) |
| Filing 5 Summons Issued as to AU Optronics Corp. America. (cjlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/1/2020) |
| Filing 4 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 10/14/2020. (haS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/30/2020) |
| Filing 3 Proposed Summons. (Glenn, Michael) (Filed on 9/29/2020) |
| Filing 2 Civil Cover Sheet by Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. . (Glenn, Michael) (Filed on 9/29/2020) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT (with jury demand) for Infringement of the '805 Patent against AU Optronics Corp. America (Filing fee $400, receipt number 0971-15000144). Filed by Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Patent, #2 Exhibit Claim)(Glenn, Michael) (Filed on 9/29/2020) Modified on 10/1/2020 (cjlS, COURT STAFF). |
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
| Search for this case: Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. AU Optronics Corp. America | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: AU Optronics Corp. America | |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Michael Joseph Glenn |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.