Auriga Innovations, Inc. v. Intel Corporation et al
Plaintiff: Auriga Innovations, Inc.
Defendant: HP Inc., Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company and Intel Corporation
Case Number: 6:2020cv00779
Filed: August 25, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Texas
Presiding Judge: Alan D Albright
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 1, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 1, 2020 Filing 23 Report on Patent/Trademark sent to U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (bot1)
October 1, 2020 Filing 22 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Auriga Innovations, Inc. (Nelson, William)
September 17, 2020 Opinion or Order Text Order GRANTING #21 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply entered by Judge Alan D Albright. This Court, after considering the foregoing Defendants Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File a Response to Plaintiffs Complaint, is of the opinion that the Motion should be granted. IT IS ORDERED that HP Inc. and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Companys Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File a Response to Plaintiffs Complaint is GRANTED. Defendants deadline to file a response to Plaintiffs Complaint is extended through and including November 2, 2020. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (ep4)
September 17, 2020 Reset Deadlines: HP Inc. answer due 11/2/2020; Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company answer due 11/2/2020. (bw)
September 15, 2020 Filing 21 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #1 Complaint, by HP Inc., Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Ravel, J.)
September 15, 2020 Filing 20 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by J. Stephen Ravel on behalf of HP Inc., Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. Attorney J. Stephen Ravel added to party HP Inc.(pty:dft), Attorney J. Stephen Ravel added to party Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company(pty:dft) (Ravel, J.)
September 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER GRANTING #18 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Signed by Judge Alan D Albright. (am)
September 10, 2020 Reset Deadlines: Intel Corporation answer due 11/2/2020. (am)
September 9, 2020 Filing 18 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #1 Complaint, by Intel Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Ravel, J.)
September 9, 2020 Filing 17 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by J. Stephen Ravel on behalf of Intel Corporation. Attorney J. Stephen Ravel added to party Intel Corporation(pty:dft) (Ravel, J.)
September 2, 2020 Filing 16 RULE 7 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (Smith, Stefani)
September 1, 2020 Filing 15 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Auriga Innovations, Inc.. Intel Corporation served on 8/27/2020, answer due 9/17/2020. (Nelson, William)
September 1, 2020 Filing 14 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Auriga Innovations, Inc.. HP Inc. served on 8/27/2020, answer due 9/17/2020. (Nelson, William)
September 1, 2020 Filing 13 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Auriga Innovations, Inc.. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company served on 8/27/2020, answer due 9/17/2020. (Nelson, William)
August 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Text Order GRANTING #12 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Before the Court is the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice. The Court, having reviewed the Motion, finds it should be GRANTED and therefore orders as follows: IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant, if he/she has not already done so, shall immediately tender the amount of $100.00, made payable to: Clerk, U.S. District Court, in compliance with Local Rule AT-I (f)(2). Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Alan D Albright. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jy)
August 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Text Order GRANTING #11 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Before the Court is the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice. The Court, having reviewed the Motion, finds it should be GRANTED and therefore orders as follows: IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant, if he/she has not already done so, shall immediately tender the amount of $100.00, made payable to: Clerk, U.S. District Court, in compliance with Local Rule AT-I (f)(2). Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Alan D Albright. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jy)
August 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Text Order GRANTING #10 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Before the Court is the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice. The Court, having reviewed the Motion, finds it should be GRANTED and therefore orders as follows: IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant, if he/she has not already done so, shall immediately tender the amount of $100.00, made payable to: Clerk, U.S. District Court, in compliance with Local Rule AT-I (f)(2). Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Alan D Albright. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jy)
August 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Text Order GRANTING #9 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Before the Court is the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice. The Court, having reviewed the Motion, finds it should be GRANTED and therefore orders as follows: IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant, if he/she has not already done so, shall immediately tender the amount of $100.00, made payable to: Clerk, U.S. District Court, in compliance with Local Rule AT-I (f)(2). Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Alan D Albright. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jy)
August 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Text Order GRANTING #8 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Before the Court is the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice. The Court, having reviewed the Motion, finds it should be GRANTED and therefore orders as follows: IT IS ORDERED the Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Applicant, if he/she has not already done so, shall immediately tender the amount of $100.00, made payable to: Clerk, U.S. District Court, in compliance with Local Rule AT-I (f)(2). Pursuant to our Administrative Policies and Procedures for Electronic Filing, the attorney hereby granted to practice pro hac vice in this case must register for electronic filing with our court within 10 days of this order. entered by Judge Alan D Albright. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (jy)
August 27, 2020 Filing 12 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Matthew D. Powers for Kiley White ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-13908751) by on behalf of Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Powers, Matthew)
August 27, 2020 Filing 11 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Matthew D. Powers for Natasha M. Saputo ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-13908745) by on behalf of Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Powers, Matthew)
August 27, 2020 Filing 10 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Matthew D. Powers for Jennifer Robinson ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-13908742) by on behalf of Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Powers, Matthew)
August 27, 2020 Filing 9 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Matthew D. Powers for Utsav Gupta ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-13908738) by on behalf of Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Powers, Matthew)
August 27, 2020 Filing 8 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Matthew D. Powers for Gina Cremona ( Filing fee $ 100 receipt number 0542-13908735) by on behalf of Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Powers, Matthew)
August 26, 2020 Filing 7 Summons Issued as to HP Inc. (lad)
August 26, 2020 Filing 6 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS by Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (Nelson, William)
August 26, 2020 Filing 5 Summons Issued as to Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company. (lad)
August 26, 2020 Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Intel Corporation. (lad)
August 25, 2020 Case assigned to Judge Alan D Albright. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (lad)
August 25, 2020 Filing 3 Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120). AO 120 forwarded to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (Nelson, William)
August 25, 2020 Filing 2 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS by Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (Nelson, William)
August 25, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0542-13897671), filed by Auriga Innovations, Inc.. (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 Civil Cover Sheet)(Nelson, William)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Auriga Innovations, Inc. v. Intel Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Auriga Innovations, Inc.
Represented By: William P. Nelson
Represented By: Stefani C. Smith
Represented By: Paul T. Ehrlich
Represented By: Natasha M. Saputo
Represented By: Jennifer Robinson
Represented By: Matthew D. Powers
Represented By: Utsav Gupta
Represented By: Kiley White
Represented By: Gina Cremona
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: HP Inc.
Represented By: J. Stephen Ravel
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: Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company
Represented By: J. Stephen Ravel
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: Intel Corporation
Represented By: J. Stephen Ravel
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?