Cases 31 - 40 of 534
Cisco Systems, Inc. v. VirnetX Inc.
as 23-1809
Appellant:
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Appellee:
VIRNETX INC.
Cisco Systems, Inc., et al v. Wilson Chung, et al
as 23-15590
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation and CISCO TECHNOLOGY, INC., a California corporation
Defendant / Appellee:
WILSON CHUNG and PLANTRONICS, INC., a Delaware corporation
Defendant:
JAMES HE, JEDD WILLIAMS and THOMAS PUORRO
VirnetX Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
as 23-1765
Appellant:
VIRNETX INC.
Appellee:
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
In Re: Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena Directed to Nonparties iPEL, Inc. and Brian Yates
as 2:2023mc00041
Plaintiff:
K. MIZRA, LLC
Defendant:
Cisco Systems, Inc.
In Re:
In Re: Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena Directed to Nonparties iPEL, Inc. and Brian Yates
Respondent:
iPel, Inc. and Brian Yates
Interested Party:
Microsoft Corporation
In re: Centripetal Networks, LLC
as 23-127
Petitioner:
In re: CENTRIPETAL NETWORKS, LLC
Respondent:
PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC., CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and others
Centripetal Networks, LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc.
as 5:2023mc80086
Petitioner:
Centripetal Networks, LLC
Respondent:
Cisco Systems Inc.
Bass v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
as 3:2023cv00404
Plaintiff:
Gabriella Bass
Defendant:
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
Egenera, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
as 23-1428
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EGENERA, INC.
Defendant / Appellee:
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Front Row Technologies, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
as 6:2023cv00035
Plaintiff:
Front Row Technologies, LLC
Defendant:
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1126 Patent Infringement
Ramot at Tel Aviv University Ltd. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
as 1:2023cv00012
Plaintiff:
Ramot at Tel Aviv University Ltd.
Defendant:
CISCO Systems Inc.
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.
