Crane Security Technologies, Inc. et al v. Rolling Optics AB
Plaintiff: |
Crane Security Technologies, Inc. and Visual Physics, LLC |
Defendant: |
Rolling Optics AB |
Case Number: |
1:2014cv12428 |
Filed: |
June 9, 2014 |
Court: |
US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
Office: |
Boston Office |
County: |
Suffolk |
Presiding Judge: |
William G. Young |
Nature of Suit: |
Patent |
Cause of Action: |
15 U.S.C. § 1126 |
Jury Demanded By: |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed |
Document Text |
August 23, 2018 |
Filing
538
District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER ON POST-TRIAL MOTIONS (DOC. NOS. 491, 495, & 497) entered. For the foregoing reasons, the Court ALLOWS in part and DENIES in part RO's motion for judgment as a matter of law (Doc. No. 495) as set forth herei n; ALLOWS Crane's motion for enhanced damages but DENIES Crane's motion for attorneys' fees (Doc. No. 491); and ALLOWS in part and DENIES in part Crane's motion for injunctive relief (Doc. No. 497). The Court hereby enjoins RO fro m future infringement of Crane's patents to the extent outlined in the attached Permanent Injunction and orders RO to pay Crane enhanced damages of $326,244. The parties shall submit a proposed final judgment conforming to this Order within seven days. (due 8/30/18) (Simeone, Maria)
|
April 27, 2018 |
Filing
450
District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered regarding testimony of Professor Leger.(Sorokin, Leo)
|
January 26, 2018 |
Filing
357
District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered.ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. Nos. 325 & 331): Crane's Motion (Doc. No. 325) is ALLOWED, and RO's Motion (Doc. No. 331) is DENIED. Within fourteen days (2/9/2018), the partie s shall submit a joint status report stating their joint and/or separate positions on the following topics: (1) the issue(s) remaining for trial; (2)the estimated duration of the trial; (3) any further discovery necessary before trial (including reasons to permit or not to permit such discovery); and (4) whether the parties jointly request a period of time prior to preparing for trial to mediate the matter. (Montes, Mariliz)
|
February 3, 2017 |
Filing
303
Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley: ORDER entered. Order on Rolling Optics AB's Motion to Compel Production of Documents improperly withheld (# 192 ). Please see order for details. (Moore, Kellyann)
|
February 9, 2016 |
Filing
155
District Judge Leo T. Sorokin: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON CLAIM CONSTRUCTION(Montes, Mariliz)
|
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 Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?