Voip-Pal.com, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.
| Voip-Pal.com, Inc. |
| Apple, Inc. |
| 2:2016cv00260 |
| February 9, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Cam Ferenbach |
| Richard F. Boulware |
| Patent |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1126 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 13, 2017. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Apple, Inc. re 1 Complaint. (TR) |
| Filing 3 AO 120 - REPORT on the filing or determination of an action regarding a patent or trademark. E-mailed to the US Patent and Trademark Office. (Attachments: # 1 complaint) (TR) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE IB 2-2: In accordance with 28 USC § 636(c) and FRCP 73, the parties in this action are provided with a link to the "AO 85 Notice of Availability, Consent, and Order of Reference - Exercise of Jurisdiction by a U.S. Magistrate Judge" form on the Court's website - www.nvd.uscourts.gov. AO 85 Consent forms should NOT be electronically filed. Upon consent of all parties, counsel are advised to manually file the form with the Clerk's Office. (A copy of form AO 85 has been mailed to parties not receiving electronic service.)NOTICE OF GENERAL ORDER 2013-1 AND OPPORTUNITY FOR EXPEDITED TRIAL SETTING: The parties in this action are provided with a link to General Order 2013-1 and the USDC Short Trial Rules on the Court's website - www.nvd.uscourts.gov. If the parties agree that this action can be ready for trial within 180 days and that a trial of this matter would take three (3) days or less, the parties should consider participation in the USDC Short Trial Program. If the parties wish to be considered for entry into the Court's Short Trial Program, they should execute and electronically file with USDC Short Trial Form 4(a)(1) or Form 4(a)(2). (no image attached) (TR) |
| Case assigned to Judge Richard F. Boulware, II and Magistrate Judge Cam Ferenbach. Nature of Suit: 830 Patent Case (TR) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Voip-Pal.com, Inc. (Filing fee $400 receipt number 0978-3994067), filed by Voip-Pal.com, Inc.. Certificate of Interested Parties due by 2/19/2016. Proof of service due by 6/8/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Index, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit D-(Chart 1), # 7 Exhibit D-(Chart 2), # 8 Exhibit D-(Chart 3), # 9 Exhibit D-(Chart 4), # 10 Exhibit E, # 11 Exhibit F, # 12 Exhibit F-Addendum 1, # 13 Civil Cover Sheet, # 14 Summons) (Bonds, Kurt) |
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 Nevada 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
| Search for this case: Voip-Pal.com, Inc. 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 ] |
| Defendant: Apple, 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Voip-Pal.com, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Kurt R. Bonds |
| Represented By: | Adam R Knecht |
| 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.
