Radiancy, Inc. v. Viatek Consumer Products Group, Inc.
| Radiancy, Inc. |
| Viatek Consumer Products Group, Inc. |
| 7:2013cv03767 |
| June 3, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Rockland |
| Edgardo Ramos |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 145 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
246
OPINION & ORDER re: 230 MOTION For Clarification, Or In The Alternative For Reconsideration, Of The Court's June 1, 2015 Claim Construction In The Opinion & Order re: 224 Memorandum & Opinion, filed by Radiancy, Inc. For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion to reconsider its June Opinion. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 12/22/2015) (mml)
|
|
Filing
224
OPINION & ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, the Court construes "pulsed heating of said one or more heat elements" to mean "(1) periodic switching on and off of current to said one or more heat elements or (2) generation of pulses of heat by other means (e.g., by mechanical means)." SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 6/1/2015) (lnl)
|
|
Filing
211
OPINION AND ORDER: The Court's claim construction rulings as to the terms "juxtaposed," "controller," and "comprises" are set forth above. A Markman hearing as to the remaining terms is scheduled for Monday, March 2, 2015 at 12:00 p.m. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 1/14/2015) (mml)
|
|
Filing
117
OPINION AND ORDER: In conclusion, Plaintiff's motion to strike Affirmative Defenses Six and Seven is granted. Plaintiff's motion to strike Affirmative Defense twenty-one is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff's motion to dism iss PhotoMedex as a Counterclaim Defendant is granted. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss the Counterclaim for (1) Declaratory Relief of non-infringement of the '445 Patent is granted; (2) Antitrust violation under the Sherman Act is granted; (3 ) unfair competition is granted; (4) tortious interference is granted. This opinion amends the opinion previously issued by this Court on March 28, 2014, Docket No. 113. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate PhotoMedex from this case and terminate Docket No. 55. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 4/1/2014) (mml)
|
|
Filing
113
OPINION AND ORDER re: 55 MOTION to Strike Document No. 26 Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant's Notice of Motion to Strike Affirmative Defences. MOTION to Dismiss Counterclaims filed by Radiancy, Inc. In conclusion, Plainti ff's motion to strike Affirmative Defenses Six and Seven is granted. Plaintiff's motion to strike Affirmative Defense twenty-one is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss PhotoMedex as a Counterclaim Defendan t is granted. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss the Counterclaim for (1) Declaratory Relief of non-infringement of the '445 Patent is granted; (2) Antitrust violation under the Sherman Act is granted; (3) unfair competition is granted; (4) tortious interference is granted. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to terminate PhotoMedex from this case and terminate Docket No. 55. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Nelson Stephen Roman on 3/28/2014) (mml)
|
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 York Southern 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: Radiancy, Inc. v. Viatek Consumer Products Group, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Radiancy, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Steven Michael Kayman |
| Represented By: | Victoria L. Loughery |
| Represented By: | Baldassare Vinti |
| 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: Viatek Consumer Products Group, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Xiyan Zhang |
| 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.
