Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Taasera Licensing LLC
Plaintiff / Appellant: PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC.
Defendant / Appellee: TAASERA LICENSING LLC, QUEST PATENT RESEARCH CORPORATION and QUEST PATENT RESEARCH CORP.
Case Number: 23-1736
Filed: April 11, 2023
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
Nature of Suit: Patent Infringement (Fed. Qst.)

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
December 15, 2023 PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC. v. TAASERA LICENSING LLC

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
June 21, 2023 Filing 21 CORRECTED RESPONSE BRIEF FILED by Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc. and Appellee Quest Patent Research Corp.. Service: 06/21/2023 by email. (PENDING COMPLIANCE REVIEW) [931513] [23-1736] [Alfred Fabricant] [Entered: 06/21/2023 05:24 PM]
June 21, 2023 Filing 20 NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE: The submission of Appellees Quest Patent Research Corp. and Taasera Licensing LLC, Response Brief [ # 19 ], is not in compliance with the rules of this court (see attached). Compliant document due on 06/28/2023. Unless ordered otherwise, the deadline for any responsive filing runs from service of the original version. Service as of this date by the Clerk of Court. [931407] [ALK] [Entered: 06/21/2023 02:49 PM]
June 12, 2023 Filing 19 RESPONSE BRIEF FILED by Appellees Quest Patent Research Corp. and Taasera Licensing LLC. Service: 06/12/2023 by email. [929442] [23-1736] This document is non-compliant. See Doc No. [ # 20 ]. [Alfred Fabricant] [Entered: 06/12/2023 07:55 PM]
May 11, 2023 Filing 18 MODIFIED ENTRY: CONFIDENTIAL OPENING BRIEF FILED by Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc. Service: 05/11/2023 by email. [922965]--[Edited 05/24/2023 by CMH - compliance review complete] [Douglas Hallward-Driemeier] [Entered: 05/11/2023 09:28 PM]
May 11, 2023 Filing 17 MODIFIED ENTRY: OPENING BRIEF FILED by Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc. Service: 05/11/2023 by email. Unless ordered otherwise, any responsive deadline runs from the date of service of this brief. See Fed. Cir. R. 31. [922964] --[Edited 05/24/2023 by CMH - compliance review complete] [Douglas Hallward-Driemeier] [Entered: 05/11/2023 09:26 PM]
May 5, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER filed granting the motion [ # 6 ] [ # 7 ] [ # 8 ] only to the extent provided above. Service as of this date by the Clerk of Court. [921367] [LMS] [Entered: 05/05/2023 08:57 AM]
April 24, 2023 Filing 15 REPLY of Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc. to response [ # 14 ]. Service: 04/24/2023 by email. [918735] [23-1736] [Andrew Radsch] [Entered: 04/24/2023 05:40 PM]
April 20, 2023 Filing 14 RESPONSE of Appellees Quest Patent Research Corporation and Taasera Licensing LLC to Doc No. [ # 8 ], [ # 8 ], [ # 7 ], [ # 6 ]. Service: 04/20/2023 by email. [918109] [23-1736] [Alfred Fabricant] [Entered: 04/20/2023 11:09 PM]
April 20, 2023 Filing 13 Docketing Statement for the Appellees Quest Patent Research Corporation and Taasera Licensing LLC. Service: 04/20/2023 by email. [918108] [23-1736] [Alfred Fabricant] [Entered: 04/20/2023 10:54 PM]
April 20, 2023 Filing 12 Notice of Related Case Information for Appellees Quest Patent Research Corporation and Taasera Licensing LLC. Service: 04/20/2023 by email. [918107] [23-1736] [Alfred Fabricant] [Entered: 04/20/2023 10:52 PM]
April 20, 2023 Filing 11 Certificate of Interest for Appellees Quest Patent Research Corporation and Taasera Licensing LLC. Service: 04/20/2023 by email. [918106] [23-1736] [Alfred Fabricant] [Entered: 04/20/2023 10:51 PM]
April 20, 2023 Filing 10 Entry of Appearance for Alfred R. Fabricant; Peter Lambrianakos; Vincent J. Rubino, III; Joseph M. Mercadante as counsel for Appellees Taasera Licensing LLC and Quest Patent Research Corporation. Service: 04/20/2023 by email. [918105] [23-1736]--[Edited 04/21/2023 by MMA to revise docket text] [Alfred Fabricant] [Entered: 04/20/2023 10:46 PM]
April 13, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER Any response(s) to the motions [ # 6 ], [ # 7 ], [ # 8 ], is due no later than April 20, 2023. Service as of this date by the Clerk of Court. [916608] [LMS] [Entered: 04/13/2023 02:50 PM]
April 12, 2023 Filing 8 MOTION of Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc. to expedite. Service: 04/12/2023 by email. [916418] [23-1736] [Andrew Radsch] [Entered: 04/12/2023 05:26 PM]
April 12, 2023 Filing 7 MOTION of Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc. to expedite.. Service: 04/12/2023 by email. [916412] [23-1736] [Douglas Hallward-Driemeier] [Entered: 04/12/2023 05:07 PM]
April 12, 2023 Filing 6 MOTION of Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc. to expedite.. Service: 04/12/2023 by email. [916404] [23-1736] [Douglas Hallward-Driemeier] [Entered: 04/12/2023 04:50 PM]
April 12, 2023 Filing 5 Docketing Statement for the Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc.. Service: 04/12/2023 by email. [916382] [23-1736] [Douglas Hallward-Driemeier] [Entered: 04/12/2023 04:27 PM]
April 12, 2023 Filing 4 Notice of Related Case Information for Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc.. Service: 04/12/2023 by email. [916381] [23-1736] [Douglas Hallward-Driemeier] [Entered: 04/12/2023 04:25 PM]
April 12, 2023 Filing 3 Certificate of Interest for Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc.. Service: 04/12/2023 by email. [916379] [23-1736] [Douglas Hallward-Driemeier] [Entered: 04/12/2023 04:24 PM]
April 12, 2023 Filing 2 Entry of Appearance for Douglas H. Hallward-Driemeier; Andrew T. Radsch as counsel for Appellant Palo Alto Networks, Inc.. Service: 04/12/2023 by email. [916377] [23-1736] [Douglas Hallward-Driemeier] [Entered: 04/12/2023 04:23 PM]
April 11, 2023 Filing 1 Appeal docketed. Received: 03/27/2023. [916071] Entry of Appearance is due on 04/25/2023. Certificate of Interest is due on 04/25/2023. Docketing Statement is due on 04/25/2023. Appellant's brief is due on 06/12/2023. [CMH] [Entered: 04/11/2023 04:40 PM]

Access additional case information on PACER

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.

Search for this case: Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Taasera Licensing LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff / appellant: PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC.
Represented By: Andrew T. Radsch
Represented By: Douglas Hallward-Driemeier Esq.
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 ]
Defendant / appellee: TAASERA LICENSING LLC
Represented By: Alfred Ross Fabricant
Represented By: Peter Lambrianakos
Represented By: Joseph M. Mercadante
Represented By: Vincent J. Rubino III
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 ]
Defendant / appellee: QUEST PATENT RESEARCH CORPORATION
Represented By: Alfred Ross Fabricant
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 ]
Defendant / appellee: QUEST PATENT RESEARCH CORP.
Represented By: Alfred Ross Fabricant
Represented By: Peter Lambrianakos
Represented By: Joseph M. Mercadante
Represented By: Vincent J. Rubino III
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.


Why Is My Information Online?