Virginia Innovation Sciences, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., LTD. et al
| Virginia Innovation Sciences, Inc. |
| Samsung Electronics Co., LTD., Samsung Electronics America, Inc. and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC. |
| 2:2012cv00548 |
| October 4, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Norfolk Office |
| Arlington |
| Mark S. Davis |
| Douglas E. Miller |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 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
569
OPINION AND ORDER Denying (416) Motion for Reconsideration in case 2:12-cv-00548-MSD-TEM. Signed by District Judge Mark S. Davis and filed on 5/2/14. Copies distributed to all parties 5/2/14. Associated Cases: 2:12-cv-00548-MSD-TEM, 2:13-cv-00332-MSD-TEM(ldab, )
|
|
Filing
492
ORDER re: 141 Motion to Strike 141 MOTION to Strike 131 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim,, or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment on Defendants' Thirteenth Counterclaim Related to Inequitable Conduct, 266 MOTION to Bifurcate , 154 MOTION and Memorandum in Support of Request for Judicial Notice re 152 Response in Opposition to Motion, ; 154 Motion ; 266 Motion to Bifurcate. For the reasons stat ed above, Plaintiff's motion to strike, or, in the alternative, for summary judgment with regard to Defendants' Thirteenth Counterclaim is hereby GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. ECF No. 141. Defendants were permitted to add the inequitable conduct counterclaim and affirmative defense without leave of court under either the permissive or moderate interpretations of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion to Strike is DENIED. ECF No. 141. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. ECF No. 141. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED. ECF No. 154. Plaintiff's Motion to Bifurcate is DENIED as moot. ECF No. 266. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Mark S. Davis on 3/28/14 and filed 3/31/14. Copies distributed to all parties 3/31/14. (ldab, )
|
|
Filing
395
OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 124 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting 126 Motion. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Count VIII, alleging willful infringement, (ECF No. 124) is GRANTED with respect to the '711, '268, and '381 patents, and DENIED with respect to the '492, '733, and '398 patents. Defendants' Motion to Strike (ECF No. 124) is DENIED. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice (ECF No. 126) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Mark S. Davis and filed on 11/15/13. Copies distributed to all counsel of record 11/17/13. (ldab, )
|
|
Filing
198
OPINION AND ORDER - For the reasons set forth above, the Court issues this Opinion and Order as the construction of the disputed claim terms in the '492 patent family and the '733 patent family. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Mark S. Davis and on 9/25/13. Copies distributed to all parties 9/25/13.(ldab, )
|
|
Filing
58
OPINION AND ORDER - The Court DENIES Defendants' Motion to Transfer Venue and further DENIES Defendants' alternative request for limited, venue-related discovery. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Mark S. Davis and filed on 3/6/13. Copies distributed to all parties 3/6/13.(ldab, )
|
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 Virginia 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
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.
