Altair Logix LLC v. Ubiquiti Inc.,
Altair Logix LLC |
Ubiquiti Inc. |
1:2021cv00236 |
February 22, 2021 |
US District Court for the District of Delaware |
Christopher J Burke |
Maryellen Noreika |
Patent |
35 U.S.C. ยง 271 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on April 22, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 16 ORDER: On or before April 28, 2021, the parties shall either (1) file an executed Form AO 85A Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Dispositive Motion to a Magistrate Judge that sets forth the parties' consent to consideration of the pending Motions to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (D.I. 11 in C.A. No. 20-1282; D.I. 10 in C.A. 21-236) by a Magistrate Judge or (2) file a joint letter indicating that the parties do not so consent. If there is no consent, the letter shall not indicate which party or parties did not consent. Signed by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 4/22/2021. Associated Cases: 1:20-cv-01282-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-00236-MN-CJB(mdb) |
Filing 15 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Neil J. McNabnay, Ricardo J. Bonilla, and Michael R. Ellis - filed by Ubiquiti Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Anderson, Jeremy) |
Filing 14 ORAL ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall meet and confer and discuss, in person and/or by telephone, each of the matters listed on Judge Burke's Case Management Checklist (Checklist). Within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, the parties shall jointly file the following: (i) a copy of the Checklist, indicating the names of Lead Counsel and Delaware Counsel for each party; (ii) a proposed Scheduling Order, which is consistent with Judge Burke/s "Rule 16 Scheduling Order - Patent" up through and including paragraph number 16 (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule leading up to but not including the case dispositive motion stage of the case) and that is consistent with paragraphs 15-22 of Judge Noreika's "Patent Scheduling Order - Non-ANDA" (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule from the case dispositive motion stage through post-trial motions); and (iii) a letter, not to exceed three pages, that contains the following: (a) a description of what this case is about; (b) the parties' positions regarding any disputes in the proposed Scheduling Order, and (c) a list of the three most significant topics (other than Scheduling Order disputes) discussed during the parties review of the Checklist items, along with a brief description as to what was discussed as to those topics. Thereafter, the Court may schedule a Case Management Conference/Rule 16 Scheduling Conference to be held with Judge Burke. The Checklist and both Scheduling Orders can be found on Judge Burke's/Judge Noreika's portions of the District Court's website. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/16/2021. (dlb) |
MOTION REFERRED: #10 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Motion referred to Christopher J. Burke.(dlb) |
Filing 13 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: No Parents or Affiliates Listed filed by Ubiquiti Inc.. (Anderson, Jeremy) |
Filing 12 ANSWER to #1 Complaint, with Jury Demand , COUNTERCLAIM against Altair Logix LLC by Ubiquiti Inc..(Anderson, Jeremy) |
Filing 11 OPENING BRIEF in Support re #10 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Ubiquiti Inc..Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 4/29/2021. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Anderson, Jeremy) |
Filing 10 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - filed by Ubiquiti Inc.. (Anderson, Jeremy) |
Filing 9 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move or otherwise respond to the Complaint to April 15, 2021 - filed by Ubiquiti Inc.. (Anderson, Jeremy) |
SO ORDERED D.I. #9 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move or otherwise respond to the Complaint to April 15, 2021 filed by Ubiquiti Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/5/2021. (dlb) |
Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Altair Logix LLC. Ubiquiti Inc. served on 2/23/2021, answer due 3/16/2021. (Chong, Jimmy) (Main Document 8 replaced on 3/1/2021) (apk). |
REMARK: The parties should be aware that the Court encourages the participation of newer attorneys in courtroom proceedings and at oral argument. Please see the Court's Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys, a link to which is provided here for the parties' convenience:#http://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/forms/StandingOrder2017.pdf (dlb) |
CORRECTING ENTRY: DI #8 replaced per counsels request. (apk) |
Filing 7 ORAL ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is referred to Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke to hear and resolve all pre-trial matters up to and including expert discovery matters (but not including summary judgment motions, Daubert motions, pre-trial motions in limine or the pre-trial conference), subject to 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and any further Order of the Court. All subsequent filings in this action shall be captioned as follows: Civil Action No. 21-236-MN-CJB. ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 2/26/2021. (dlw) |
Pro Hac Vice Attorney David R. Bennett for Altair Logix LLC added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-00234-MN, 1:21-cv-00235-MN, 1:21-cv-00236-MN.(kmd) |
SO ORDERED re #6 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney David R. Bennett filed by Altair Logix LLC. ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 2/26/2021. (dlw) |
Filing 6 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney David R. Bennett - filed by Altair Logix LLC. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Chong, Jimmy) |
Case Assigned to Judge Maryellen Noreika. Please include the initials of the Judge (MN) after the case number on all documents filed. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-00234-MN, 1:21-cv-00235-MN, 1:21-cv-00236-MN (rjb) |
Filing 5 Summonses Issued (please complete the top portion of the form and print out for use/service). (nmg) |
Filing 4 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: No Parents or Affiliates Listed filed by Altair Logix LLC. (nmg) |
Filing 3 Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) 6,289,434. (nmg) |
Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (nmg) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT for PATENT INFRINGEMENT filed with Jury Demand against Ubiquiti Inc. - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ADEDC-3535640.) - filed by Altair Logix LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(nmg) |
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
Search for this case: Altair Logix LLC v. Ubiquiti Inc., | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Altair Logix LLC | |
Represented By: | Jimmy C. Chong |
Represented By: | David R. Bennett |
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: Ubiquiti Inc. | |
Represented By: | Jeremy Douglas Anderson |
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.