Motorola Mobility LLC v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al
MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC |
AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES LIMITED, HANNSTAR DISPLAY CORPORATION, LG DISPLAY COMPANY, LIMITED, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY, LIMITED, SHARP ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, TOSHIBA CORPORATION and SANYO CONSUMER ELECTRONICS COMPANY, LIMITED |
14-8003 |
February 25, 2014 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 702453139 Filed AMENDED Opinion by Judge Posner. Original Opinion issued on 11/26/2014. (This amended opinion replaces the opinion in this case that was issued by the panel on November 26 and that is reported as 2014 WL 6678622.) [6633776] [14-8003] |
Filing 702427089 Filed opinion of the court by Judge Posner. AFFIRMED. Richard A. Posner, Circuit Judge; Michael S. Kanne, Circuit Judge and Ilana Diamond Rovner, Circuit Judge. [6623761-1] [6623761] [14-8003] |
Filing 702199172 Filed opinion of the court by Judge Posner. This case is before us on the plaintiff s unopposed petition for leave to take an interlocutory appeal, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1292(b), from an order that the district judge has certified for an immediate appeal. We grant the petition for reasons explained below; and because the petition and the defendants response, together with the district judge s opinion explaining her order and the record in the district court, provide an ample basis for deciding the appeal, we dispense with further briefing and with oral argument. AFFIRMED. Richard A. Posner, Circuit Judge; Michael S. Kanne, Circuit Judge and Ilana Diamond Rovner, Circuit Judge. [6562702-1] [6562702] [14-8003] |
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.