Cases 1 - 10 of 479
Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Ramot at Tel Aviv University Ltd.
as 24-1726
Appellant:
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Defendant / Appellee:
RAMOT AT TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY LTD.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Ramot at Tel Aviv University Ltd.
as 24-1727
Appellant:
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Defendant / Appellee:
RAMOT AT TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY LTD.
Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Ramot at Tel Aviv University Ltd.
as 24-1728
Appellant:
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Defendant / Appellee:
RAMOT AT TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY LTD.
DEVTECH SYSTEMS, INC. v. USA
as 1:2024cv00294
Plaintiff:
DEVTECH SYSTEMS, INC.
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1491 Tucker Act
Agadia Systems Inc.In re: Agadia Systems Inc.
as 24-113
Petitioner:
In re: AGADIA SYSTEMS INC.
Appellee:
KATHERINE K. VIDAL, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
Khan v. Merit Medical Systems, Inc.
as 23-2329
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NAZIR KHAN and IFTIKHAR KHAN
Defendant / Appellee:
MERIT MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
Pegasus Solar Inc. et al v. United States et al
as 1:2023cv00135
Plaintiff:
Pegasus Solar Inc., et al., Fujifilm North America Corporation, Graphic Communications Division, Pegasus Solar Inc. and others
Defendant:
United States, et al., United States, United States Trade Representative and others
Centripetal Networks, LLC v. Palo Alto Networks, Inc.
as 23-2027
Appellant:
CENTRIPETAL NETWORKS, LLC
Appellee:
PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC., CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. and KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Agadia Systems Inc.In re: Agadia Systems Inc.
as 23-1993
Appellant:
In re: AGADIA SYSTEMS INC.
Appellee:
KATHERINE K. VIDAL, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. v. Shockwave Medical, Inc.
as 23-1940
Appellant:
CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC.
Appellee:
SHOCKWAVE MEDICAL, INC.
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.
