High Point Sarl v. Sprint Nextel Corporation et al
Plaintiff: High Point Sarl
Defendant: Sprint Nextel Corporation, Sprint Spectrum L.P., SprintCom, Inc., Sprint Communications Company, L.P., Sprint Solutions, Inc., APC PCS, LLC, APC Realty and Equipment Company, LLC and STC TWO LLC
Counter Claimant: APC Realty and Equipment Company, LLC, STC TWO LLC, Sprint Nextel Corporation, Sprint Spectrum L.P., SprintCom, Inc., Sprint Communications Company, L.P., Sprint Solutions, Inc. and APC PCS, LLC
Counter Defendant: High Point Sarl
Intervenor: Motorola, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2009cv02269
Filed: May 20, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Kansas
Office: Kansas City Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Carlos Murguia
Presiding Judge: David J. Waxse
Nature of Suit: Both
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1126 Patent Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
December 11, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 1138 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying as moot 900 Motion for Summary Judgment and 1048 Sealed Motion and granting 1063 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Carlos Murguia on 12/11/14. (hw)
February 8, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 895 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 805 High Point's Motion for an Order Permiting Disclosure of Confidential Information to John Storch; denying 819 Sprint's Cross-Motion to Disqualify John Storch as an Expert for High Point. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 2/8/2013. (byk)
December 4, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 883 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 836 Sprint's Motion to Compel Avaya, Inc. to Produce Withheld Documents No Longer in Dispute and For Special Master Review of Certain Privilege Log Entries. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 12/4/2012. (byk)
November 16, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 882 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 851 Motion for Reconsideration of Memorandum and Order 851 . Signed by District Judge Carlos Murguia on 11/16/2012. (mm)
October 29, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 881 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 796 Sprint's Motion for Review of Special Master Bayer's Report and Recommendations on Privileged Documents; and granting 800 Interested Party Avaya Inc.'s Motion for Review of the April 27, 2012 Special Master's Report and Recommendations on Privileged Documents. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 10/29/2012. (byk)
September 19, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 859 ORDER ADOPTING SPECIAL MASTER'S SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS AFTER REVIEW OF MISLABELED DOCUMENTS. No objections or motion to review the Special Master's Second Supplemental Report and Recommendatio ns was filed within the 21-day time period provided in Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(f)(2). Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts in full the Special Master's recommendations contained in his 850 Second Supplemental Report (ECF No. 850). Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 9/19/2012. (byk)
August 3, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 843 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part 742 plaintiff's Motion to Adopt in Part, and Clarify and Modify In Part, the Special Master's Report and Recommendation on Claim Construction; granting in part 744 Sprint's Motion for Review of Special Master Bayer's Report and Recommendation on Claim Construction; adopting in part 722 the Special Master's Report and Recommendation on Claim Construction. Signed by District Judge Carlos Murguia on 8/3/2012. (jw)
May 4, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 790 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 734 High Point's Motion for Partial Reconsideration of January 25, 2012 Order; granting 736 Avaya Inc.'s Motion for Reconsideration of the Court's January 25, 2012 Order; and denying 764 Sprint 9;s Motion for Leave to File Surreply. With 20 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, Avaya may submit its document identified as privilege log entry 475 to the Special Master for an in camera review rather than producing it Sprint forthwith. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 5/4/2012. (byk)
April 30, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 789 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 700 High Point's Motion to Compel Sprint to Produce Documents Responsive to High Point's Fifth Set of Requests for Production No. 223. Within 30 days of the date of this Memorandu m and Order, Sprint shall produce all license and settlement agreements, damages expert reports, and transcripts of damages expert deposition testimony relating to Sprint's VOIP technology patent infringement litigation, Sprint Communications Co ., L.P. v. Vonage Holdings, Corp. (D. Kan. Civ. A. No. 05-2433) and four related cases. Sprint's relevancy objection to producing its settlement communications between Vonage and other VOIP patent litigation defendants is sustained and it need not produce these documents. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 4/30/2012. (byk)
February 14, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 737 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 592 Motorola's Motion for a Protective Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 2/14/2012. (byk)
January 25, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 723 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 573 Sprint's Motion to Compel Documents from Avaya, Inc. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, Avaya shall produce the documents identified on its privilege logs where no author or recipient is listed, and privilege log entries 475 and 237 from Avaya's supplemental privilege log for its July 2, 2010 production. Avaya shall also produce all documents for which it has asserted are protected only by the work product doctrine on its privilege logs. It is further ordered that the Court will refer the task of conducting an in camera review of Avaya's documents identified on its privilege logs as sent to "File," or authored by or sent to "Avaya," to Karl Bayer, the Special Master already appointed in this case, unless written objections are filed by February 8, 2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 1/25/2012. (byk)
September 28, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 684 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 569 Plaintiff High Point's Motion to Compel Sprint to Provide a Supplemental Response to Interrogatory Nos. 5, 11, 17-20, 23, 24. Sprint shall produce the reports identified in its resp onse brief for Interrogatory No. 11, its ATLAS database, and a key for the Ship to column of SPRINT_HP0012048 within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order. It is further ordered that each party shall bear its own fees and costs related to the motion. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 9/28/2011. (byk)
September 12, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 676 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 526 High Point's Motion to Compel Sprint to Answer Forty (40) Interrogatories. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, Sprint shall serve its supplemental ans wers to High Point's Fourth Interrogatory Nos. 26-29, Fifth Interrogatory No. 30, and Fifth Interrogatory No. 31 subparts (a)-(f), subject to the Court's specific rulings set forth herein. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Sprint is sanctioned � 36;2,000 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g) based upon its repeated assertion of numerous, repetitive, boilerplate, incorporated-by-reference "to the extent" general objections to High Point's Fourth and Fifth Set of Interrogatories. As the Court stayed payment of sanctions on High Point's first Rule 26(g) violation, the Court will likewise stay payment of Sprint's sanctions. Payment of the sanctions is stayed pending completion of this case and further order of the Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 9/12/2011. (byk)
September 9, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 675 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re High Point's Response to the Court's 669 July 29, 2011 Order to Show Cause. High Point is not required to pay a portion of Sprint's reasonable expenses under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(a)(5)(A) based upon the Court&# 039;s finding that the majority of High Points discovery objections were substantially justified. High Point, however, is sanctioned $1,000 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g)(3) based upon its assertion of confidentiality objections in response to Sprint's document requests, interrogatories, and Rule 30(b)(6) deposition topics seeking third-party licensing correspondence, when a protective order was already entered in the case. Payment of this sanction is stayed, however, pending completion of this case and further order of the Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 9/9/2011. (byk)
July 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 669 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 544 Sprint's Motion to Compel Production of High Point's Licensing Communications. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, High Point shall serve its responses to Sprint's vari ous discovery requests requesting High Point's third-party licensing communications. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that High Point show cause in writing, no later August 12, 2011, why the Court should not order it to pay a portion of Sprint's reasonable expenses incurred in filing the motion to compel, as a sanction pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g)(3) for asserting a discovery objection not warranted by existing law. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 7/29/2011. (byk)
February 2, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 538 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying without prejudice in part 293 Defendants' Motion to Compel Subpoenaed Documents From Avaya, Inc.; and granting in part and denying in part 442 Avaya Inc.'s Motion to Strike Sprint's Reply in Support of its Motion to Compel. Within 30 days of the date of this Memorandum and Order, Avaya shall produce all documents responsive to the subpoena that it has not previously produced, except for documents that are being withheld based on an assertion of attorney-client privilege, attorney work product, and/or a common interest privilege. Avaya's Motion to Strike Sprint's Reply is denied, but the alternative relief requested is granted in part. No later than March 1, 2011, Sprint may file a motion to compel attacking Avaya's assertion of privilege as a basis for withholding documents responsive to Sprint's April 13, 2010 subpoena. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 2/2/2011. (byk)
January 20, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 521 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 447 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 1/20/2011. (mh)
January 18, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 514 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 290 Motion to Compel; denying 373 Motion for Leave to File; denying 385 Motion for Protective Order. See MEMORANDUM AND ORDER for details and deadlines. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 1/18/2011. (sr)
January 14, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 512 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 270 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 1/14/2011. (mh)
January 12, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 510 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying without prejudice 316 Sealed Motion for a Protective Order, and denying 436 Sealed Motion to Supplement the Motion for a Protective Order. See MEMORANDUM AND ORDER for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 1/12/2011. (sr)
November 17, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 481 ORDER APPOINTING SPECIAL MASTER. Order sent by regular United States Mail to Special Master, Karl Bayer, 8911 North Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 2120 Austin, Texas 78759. Signed by Magistrate Judge David J. Waxse on 11/17/10. (mh)
March 29, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 240 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying without prejudice 197 defendants' Cross-Motion to Limit Asserted Number of Patent Claims. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties meet with Magistrate Judge Waxse for the purpose of setting a claim construction schedule to include the exchanges, disclosures, briefs and procedures set out in the Memorandum and Order. See Memorandum and Order for further details. Signed by District Judge Carlos Murguia on 3/29/2010. (jw)
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 Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: High Point Sarl v. Sprint Nextel Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: High Point Sarl
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: Sprint Nextel Corporation
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: Sprint Spectrum L.P.
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: SprintCom, Inc.
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: Sprint Communications Company, L.P.
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: Sprint Solutions, Inc.
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: APC PCS, LLC
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: APC Realty and Equipment Company, LLC
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: STC TWO LLC
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 ]
Counter claimant: APC Realty and Equipment Company, LLC
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 ]
Counter claimant: STC TWO LLC
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 ]
Counter claimant: Sprint Nextel Corporation
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 ]
Counter claimant: Sprint Spectrum L.P.
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 ]
Counter claimant: SprintCom, Inc.
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 ]
Counter claimant: Sprint Communications Company, L.P.
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 ]
Counter claimant: Sprint Solutions, Inc.
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 ]
Counter claimant: APC PCS, LLC
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 ]
Counter defendant: High Point Sarl
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 ]
Intervenor: Motorola, Inc.
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?