Golden Bridge Technology Inc. v. Research In Motion Limited et al
| Golden Bridge Technology Inc. |
| Research In Motion Limited and Research in Motion Corporation |
| 1:2012cv00479 |
| April 13, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Delaware |
| Wilmington Office |
| New Castle |
| Sue L. Robinson |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 8, 2012. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Case Assigned to Judge Sue L. Robinson. Please include the initials of the Judge (SLR) after the case number on all documents filed. Associated Cases: 1:12-cv-00471-SLR and 1:12-cv-00473-SLR through 1:12-cv-00483-SLR (rjb) |
| No Summons Issued. (rwc) |
| Filing 4 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1 filed by Golden Bridge Technology Inc. (rwc) |
| Filing 3 Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) 6,574,267 B1; 6,574,267 C1. (rwc) |
| Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (rwc) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT - filed with Jury Demand against Research In Motion Limited, Research in Motion Corporation - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. ( Filing fee $ 350.00, receipt number 0311-1056507.) - filed by Golden Bridge Technology Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Civil Cover Sheet)(rwc) |
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 Delaware 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.
