PHD Research Group, Inc. v. Asetek, A/S et al
| PHD Research Group, Inc. |
| Asetek, A/S and Asetek USA, Inc. |
| 5:2014cv04753 |
| October 28, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Jose Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Nathanael M. Cousins |
| Edward J. Davila |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 |
| 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
43
ORDER GRANTING 42 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal filed by PHD Research Group, Inc. The Clerk shall close this file. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 4/10/2015. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/10/2015)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE SETTLEMENT. Stipulated Dismissal or Joint Statement due by 5/14/2015. Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 5/21/2015 09:00 AM in Courtroom 4, 5th Floor, San Jose, before Hon. Edward J. Davila. The Order to Show Cause shall be automatically vacated and the parties relieved of the obligation to file a joint statement if a stipulated dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) is filed on or before May 14, 2015. All other pretrial deadlines and hearing dates are VACATED and any pending motions are TERMINATED. Failure to comply with any part of this Order will be deemed sufficient grounds to dismiss the action. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 2/25/2015. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/25/2015)
|
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.
