Sentient Sensors, LLC v. Xilinx Incorporated
| Sentient Sensors, LLC |
| Xilinx Incorporated |
| 1:2022cv00173 |
| February 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Delaware |
| Maryellen Noreika |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 1, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: identifying Other Affiliate Advanced Micro Devices Inc. for Xilinx Incorporated filed by Xilinx Incorporated. (Cottrell, Frederick) |
| Filing 11 OPENING BRIEF in Support re #10 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Xilinx Incorporated.Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 4/18/2022. (Cottrell, Frederick) |
| Filing 10 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - filed by Xilinx Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Cottrell, Frederick) |
| Pro Hac Vice Attorney Mary Pheng for Xilinx Incorporated 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. (mpb) |
| Pro Hac Vice Attorney Aaron R. Fahrenkrog for Xilinx Incorporated 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. (apk) |
| Pro Hac Vice Attorney William R Jones and Emily J Tremblay for Xilinx Incorporated 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. (mpb) |
| Filing 9 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Aaron R. Fahrenkrog, Emily J. Tremblay, Mary Pheng, and William R. Jones - filed by Xilinx Incorporated. (Cottrell, Frederick) |
SO ORDERED re #9 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Aaron R. Fahrenkrog, Emily J. Tremblay, Mary Pheng, and William R. Jones filed by Xilinx Incorporated. ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 3/9/2022. (dlw)
|
| Filing 8 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to Answer Complaint to April 1, 2022 - filed by Xilinx Incorporated. (Cottrell, Frederick) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Alexandra M. Ewing on behalf of Xilinx Incorporated (Ewing, Alexandra) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Frederick L. Cottrell, III on behalf of Xilinx Incorporated (Cottrell, Frederick) |
|
SO ORDERED re #8 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to Answer Complaint to April 1, 2022 (Set/Reset Answer Deadlines: Xilinx Incorporated answer due 4/1/2022). ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 3/3/2022. (dlw)
|
| Case Assigned to Judge Maryellen Noreika. Please include the initials of the Judge (MN) after the case number on all documents filed. (rjb) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Sentient Sensors, LLC. Xilinx Incorporated served on 2/9/2022, answer due 3/2/2022. (Farnan, Michael) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued with Magistrate Consent Notice attached as to Xilinx Incorporated on 2/8/2022. (apk) |
| Filing 3 Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) US 6,938,177 B1. (apk) |
| Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (apk) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT filed with Jury Demand against Xilinx Incorporated - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ADEDC-3798353.) - filed by Sentient Sensors, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(apk) |
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.
