Cases filed in the Ninth Circuit Courts
Cases 1 - 10 of 21
The Indirect Purchaser Settlem, et al v. Samsung Electronics Company Lt, et al
as 14-16412
: In re: DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY (DRAM) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellee: THE INDIRECT PURCHASER SETTLEMENT CLASS and THE GOVERNMENT PURCHASER PLAINTIFF CLASSES
Objector - Appellant: SHANNON CASHION, W. CHRISTOPHER MCDONOUGH and KELLY KRESS
Defendant - Appellee: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD., WINBOND ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG and others
The Indirect Purchaser Settlem, et al v. Samsung Electronics Company Lt, et al
as 14-16361
: In re: DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY (DRAM) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellee: THE INDIRECT PURCHASER SETTLEMENT CLASS and THE GOVERNMENT PURCHASER PLAINTIFF CLASSES
Objector - Appellant: DAVID C. MARLOW
Defendant - Appellee: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD., WINBOND ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG and others
The Indirect Purchaser Settlem, et al v. Samsung Electronics Company Lt, et al
as 14-16364
: In re: DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY (DRAM) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellee: THE INDIRECT PURCHASER SETTLEMENT CLASS and THE GOVERNMENT PURCHASER PLAINTIFF CLASSES
Objector - Appellant: BARBARA COCHRAN, JAMES GLASE and BRYAN MARCUS
Defendant - Appellee: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD., WINBOND ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG and others
The Indirect Purchaser Settlem, et al v. Samsung Electronics Company Lt, et al
as 14-16360
: In re: DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY (DRAM) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellee: THE INDIRECT PURCHASER SETTLEMENT CLASS and THE GOVERNMENT PURCHASER PLAINTIFF CLASSES
Objector - Appellant: NORMAN D. PALMER and ESTATE OF FERN COOK
Defendant - Appellee: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD., WINBOND ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG and others
The Indirect Purchaser Settlem, et al v. Samsung Electronics Company Lt, et al
as 14-16342
: In re: DYNAMIC RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY (DRAM) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellee: THE INDIRECT PURCHASER SETTLEMENT CLASS and THE GOVERNMENT PURCHASER PLAINTIFF CLASSES
Objector - Appellant: SEAN KENNETH HULL, RAYMOND FRANCIS CAMPBELL and SUPEROXYGEN, INC.
Defendant - Appellee: SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD., WINBOND ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG and others
Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al v. Hynix Semiconductor Inc. et al
as 2:2011cv01145
Plaintiff: Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC
Defendant: Hynix Semiconductor Inc., Hynix Semiconductor America Inc., Elpida Memory, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Elpida Memory, Inc. et al v. On Semiconductor Corporation et al
as 4:2010cv05014
Plaintiff: Elpida Memory, Inc. and Elpida Memory (USA) Inc.
Defendant: On Semiconductor Corporation and Semiconductor Components Industries, L.L.C.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Elpida Memory, Inc. et al v. On Semiconductor Corporation et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2010cv05014
Plaintiff: Elpida Memory, Inc. and Elpida Memory (USA) Inc.
Defendant: On Semiconductor Corporation and Semiconductor Components Industries, L.L.C.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
ON Semiconductor Corporation et al v. Hynix Semiconductor Inc et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 5:2010cv04687
Plaintiff: On Semiconductor Corporation and Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC
Defendant: Hynix Semiconductor Inc , Hynix Semiconductor America Inc , Hynix Semiconductor Manufacturing America, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
ON Semiconductor Corporation et al v. Hynix Semiconductor Inc et al
as 3:2010cv04687
Plaintiff: On Semiconductor Corporation and Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC
Defendant: Hynix Semiconductor Inc , Hynix Semiconductor America Inc , Hynix Semiconductor Manufacturing America, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271

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?