POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED v. NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
| POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED |
| NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION |
| 2:2023cv00044 |
| February 6, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas |
| Rodney Gilstrap |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 8, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
SUMMONS Returned Executed by POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED. NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION served on 3/24/2023, answer due 4/14/2023. (Nelson, Edward)
|
|
Filing 9
SUMMONS REISSUED as to NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION. (ch, )
|
|
Filing 8
SUMMONS Issued as to NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION. (ch, )
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Ryan P Griffin on behalf of POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED (Griffin, Ryan)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jonathan Hart Rastegar on behalf of POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED (Rastegar, Jonathan)
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by David Thomas DeZern on behalf of POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED (DeZern, David)
|
|
Filing 4
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED identifying Corporate Parent WI-LAN Inc., Corporate Parent Quarterhill Inc. for POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED. (Nelson, Edward)
|
|
Filing 3
SUMMONS Issued as to NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION. (nkl, )
|
|
Filing 2
Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120). AO 120 mailed to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (Nelson, Edward)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement against NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ATXEDC-9343370.), filed by POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Nelson, Edward)
|
|
Case Assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap. (nkl, )
|
|
In accordance with the provisions of 28 USC Section 636(c), you are hereby notified that a U.S. Magistrate Judge of this district court is available to conduct any or all proceedings in this case including a jury or non-jury trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. The form #Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge is available on our website. All signed consent forms, excluding pro se parties, should be filed electronically using the event Notice Regarding Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge. (nkl, )
|
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 Texas Eastern 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: POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED v. NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: POLARIS INNOVATIONS LIMITED | |
| Represented By: | Edward R Nelson, III |
| Represented By: | David Thomas DeZern |
| Represented By: | Jonathan Hart Rastegar |
| Represented By: | Ryan P Griffin |
| 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: NANYA TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION | |
| 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.
