Wi-LAN USA, Inc. v. Research in Motion Limited et al

Plaintiff: Wi-LAN USA, Inc.
Defendant: Research in Motion Limited and Research in Motion Corporation
Case Number: 1:2012cv24349
Filed: December 10, 2012
Court: Florida Southern District Court
Office: Miami Office
County: Miami-Dade
Referring Judge: Dave Lee Brannon
Presiding Judge: Donald M. Middlebrooks
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:0271 Patent Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

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 Florida Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wi-LAN USA, Inc. v. Research in Motion Limited et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Wi-LAN USA, Inc.
Represented By: Curtis David Carlson
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Research in Motion Limited
Represented By: Marcos Daniel Jimenez
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Research in Motion Corporation
Represented By: Marcos Daniel Jimenez
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 [ 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.