HOLOCHIP CORP. v. OPTOTUNE AG
HOLOCHIP CORP. |
OPTOTUNE AG |
2:2021cv17205 |
September 20, 2021 |
US District Court for the District of New Jersey |
Andre M Espinosa |
Susan D Wigenton |
Patent |
35 U.S.C. ยง 271 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on November 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 10 ORDER granting motion to stay; administratively terminating this matter, etc. Signed by Judge Susan D. Wigenton on 11/17/2021. (lag, ) |
Set Deadlines as to #9 MOTION to Stay (Defendant Optotune's Unopposed). Motion set for 12/20/2021 before Judge Susan D. Wigenton. Unless otherwise directed by the Court, this motion will be decided on the papers and no appearances are required. Note that this is an automatically generated message from the Clerk`s Office and does not supersede any previous or subsequent orders from the Court. (lag, ) |
Filing 9 MOTION to Stay (Defendant Optotune's Unopposed) by OPTOTUNE AG. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Notice of Motion, #2 Exhibit Exhibit A, #3 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order, #4 Civil Cover Sheet Certificate of Service)(WIGGINS, SHEILA) |
Filing 8 SUMMONS ISSUED as to OPTOTUNE AG. Attached is the official court Summons, please fill out Defendant and Plaintiffs attorney information and serve. (lag, ) |
Filing 7 AO120 Patent Form filed. (Attachments: #1 Complaint) (lag, ) |
Filing 6 NOTICE by HOLOCHIP CORP. re #1 Complaint,, Civil Cover Sheet (HILL, BRIAN) |
Filing 5 Request for Summons to be Issued by HOLOCHIP CORP. as to OPTOTUNE AG. (HILL, BRIAN) |
Filing 4 TEXT ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Susan D. Wigenton and Magistrate Judge Andre M. Espinosa for all further proceedings. Judge Brian R. Martinotti, Magistrate Judge Leda D. Wettre no longer assigned to case. So Ordered by Chief Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 9/21/21. (ak, ) |
Case Assigned to Magistrate Judge Leda D. Wettre. (ak, ) |
Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement by HOLOCHIP CORP. identifying NONE as Corporate Parent.. (HILL, BRIAN) |
Filing 2 Certification of Holochip Corp. on behalf of HOLOCHIP CORP.. (HILL, BRIAN) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Optotune AG ( Filing and Admin fee $ 402 receipt number BNJDC-12815649) with JURY DEMAND, filed by HOLOCHIP CORP.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10, #11 Exhibit 11, #12 Exhibit 12, #13 Exhibit 13, #14 Exhibit 14, #15 Exhibit 15, #16 Exhibit 16, #17 Exhibit 17, #18 Exhibit 18, #19 Exhibit 19, #20 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(HILL, BRIAN) |
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 New Jersey 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: HOLOCHIP CORP. v. OPTOTUNE AG | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: HOLOCHIP CORP. | |
Represented By: | BRIAN D. HILL |
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: OPTOTUNE AG | |
Represented By: | SHEILA RAFTERY WIGGINS |
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.