Cases 61 - 68 of 68
Rembrandt Technologies LP v. Time Warner Cable Inc.
as 1:2007cv00402
Plaintiff:
Rembrandt Technologies LP
Defendant:
Time Warner Cable Inc.
Movant:
Coxcom Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
Rembrandt Technologies LP v. Comcast Corporation et al
as 1:2007cv00398
Plaintiff:
Rembrandt Technologies LP, Rembrandt Technologies LP and Rembrandt Technologies LP
Defendant:
Comcast Corporation, Comcast Cable Communications LLC and Comcast of Plano LP
Respondent:
Fish & Richardson PC
Movant:
Time Warner Cable Inc., Coxcom Inc. and Coxcom Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
Rembrandt Technologies LP v. Time Warner Cable Inc. et al
as 1:2007cv00401
Plaintiff:
Rembrandt Technologies LP
Defendant:
Time Warner Cable Inc., Time Warner Cable LLC, Time Warner Entertainment Company L P and others
Movant:
Coxcom Inc., Comcast Cable Communications LLC, Comcast Corporation and others
Counter Claimant:
Time Warner Cable Inc., Rembrandt Technologies LP, Time Warner Entertainment Advance/Newhouse Partnership and others
Counter Defendant:
Rembrandt Technologies LP, Time Warner Cable Inc., Rembrandt Technologies LP and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338 Patent Infringement
In re: Rembrandt Technologies LP Patent Litigation
as 1:2007md01848
In Re:
Rembrandt Technologies LP Patent Litigation
Defendant:
Adelphia Communications Corporation; Century-TCI California, LP; Century-TCI California Communications, LP; Century-TCI Distribution Company, LLC; Century-TCI Holdings, LLC; Parnassos, LP; Parnassos C, Cox Communications, Inc., Cox Enterprises, Inc. and others
Counter Defendant:
Rembrandt Technologies, LLC d/b/a Remstream
Not Classified By Court:
Clerk Jeffery N. Luthi, Rembrandt Technologies LP, Cablevision Systems Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338
Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing L P v. Time Warner Cable Inc
as 2:2007cv02134
Plaintiff:
Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing L P, Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing L P, Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing L P and others
Defendant:
Time Warner Cable Inc, Time Warner Cable Inc, Time Warner Cable Inc and others
Counter Claimant:
Qwest Communications International Inc, Qwest Communications International Inc, Qwest Wireless LLC and others
Counter Defendant:
Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing L P, Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing L P, Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing L P and others
Special Master:
Bernard H Chao
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation
as 2:2007ml01816
Defendant:
Carolina Power & Light Company, Citizens Communications, Time Warner Cable Inc and others
Counter Defendant:
Ronald Katz Technology Licensing, L.P., Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc., Xerox Global Services Inc and others
3Rd Party Defendant:
International Business Machines Corporation, Intervoice Inc and Aspect Communications Corporation
3Rd Party Plaintiff:
Macy's Inc, Bloomingdale's Inc, FDS Bank and others
Counter Claimant:
21st Century Casualty Company, Randall's Food Markets Inc, DIRECTV Holding, LLC and others
Special Master:
Martin Quinn and Bernard H Chao
Petitioner:
Target Corporation, Target Bank, Robert Cohn and others
Cross Defendant:
International Business Machines Corp
Plaintiff:
Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing LP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Time Warner Cable Inc. v. GPNE Corp.
as 1:2007cv00067
Plaintiff:
Time Warner Cable Inc.
Defendant:
GPNE Corp. and GPNE Corp.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
GPNE Corp. v. Time Warner Cable, Inc., et al
as 6:2007cv00060
Plaintiff:
GPNE Corp, GPNE Corp, GPNE Corp and others
Defendant:
Time Warner Cable, Inc., Time Warner Cable, Inc., Time Warner Cable, Inc. and others
Counter Claimant:
Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, Charter Communications, Inc. and Charter Communications, Inc.
Counter Defendant:
GPNE Corp and GPNE Corp
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
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.
