MASA LLC v. Apple Inc.

MASA LLC v. Apple Inc.

Plaintiff:	MASA LLC
Defendant:	Apple Inc.
Case Number:	4:2015cv00889
Filed:	June 5, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office:	St. Louis Office
County:	St. Louis - County
Presiding Judge:	Audrey G. Fleissig
Nature of Suit:	Patent
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1338
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
May 9, 2016	Filing 53 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Apple Inc.s motion to stay pending inter partes review is GRANTED. (Doc. No. 45 .) This case is STAYED pending final resolution of Defendants petition for inter partes review. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within seven (7) days following final resolution of Defendants petition for inter partes review, Defendant shall file an appropriate motion as to lifting of the stay and the parties shall submit a joint proposed schedule for the remai nder of this litigation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case shall be deemed closed administratively, for statistical purposes only, subject to reopening upon lifting of the stay herein imposed or other appropriate Order. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 05/09/2016. (KCB)
February 17, 2016	Filing 39 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER :IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Apple Inc.s motion to transfer is DENIED. (Doc. No. 32 .) Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 02/17/2016. (KCB)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 9, 2016

Filing 53 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Apple Inc.s motion to stay pending inter partes review is GRANTED. (Doc. No. 45 .) This case is STAYED pending final resolution of Defendants petition for inter partes review. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within seven (7) days following final resolution of Defendants petition for inter partes review, Defendant shall file an appropriate motion as to lifting of the stay and the parties shall submit a joint proposed schedule for the remai nder of this litigation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case shall be deemed closed administratively, for statistical purposes only, subject to reopening upon lifting of the stay herein imposed or other appropriate Order. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 05/09/2016. (KCB)

February 17, 2016

Filing 39 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER :IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Apple Inc.s motion to transfer is DENIED. (Doc. No. 32 .) Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 02/17/2016. (KCB)

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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MASA LLC v. Apple Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: MASA LLC
Represented By:	Robert M. Evans, Jr.
Represented By:	Elizabeth E. Fabick
Represented By:	Kyle G Gottuso
Represented By:	Keith A. Rabenberg
Represented By:	Marc W. Vander Tuig
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: Apple Inc.
Represented By:	B. Trent Webb
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?