Computer Cache Coherency Corporation v. Intel Corporation
| 5:2005cv01766 |
| April 28, 2005 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Jose Office |
| Howard R. Lloyd |
| Ronald M. Whyte |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
| Both |
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
235
ORDER by Judge Whyte granting in part and denying in part 231 Motion for Taxation of Costs. Costs taxed in the amount of $89,808.84 against Computer Cache Coherency Corporation. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2009)
|
|
Filing
219
AMENDED JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Whyte on 08/31/09. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/31/2009) Modified on 8/31/2009 (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF).
|
|
Filing
217
ORDER 213 Re: Stipulated Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice of Defendnats' Counterclaims for Declaratory Judgment of Invalidity and Unenforceability and for Order Directing Clerk to Enter Judgment. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 8/24/09. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/24/2009)
|
|
Filing
196
ORDER by Judge Whyte granting 192 Motion for Leave to File Motion for Reconsideration of Order on Cross-Motions Re: Infringement. (rmwlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/21/2008)
|
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: Computer Cache Coherency Corporation v. Intel Corporation | |
|---|---|
| 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.
