ImmerVision, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.
1:21-cv-01484
Overview
Case Number
1:21-cv-01484
Filing Date
2021-10-22
Status
Litigation filed
Court
District Court, D. Delaware (ded)
Presiding Judge
Maryellen Noreika
Nature of Suit
830 Patent
Jurisdiction Type
Federal Question
Cause of Action
35:271 Patent Infringement
Jury Demand
Plaintiff
Parties
Defendant
Apple, Inc.
Represented By
11 Attorneys ListedPotter Anderson & Corroon, LLP
Tel: +1 (302) 984-6000
Fax: +1 (302) 778-6000
1313 N. Market St., Hercules Plaza, 6th Flr., P.O. Box 951
Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP
Tel: +1 (302) 984-6000
1313 N. Market St., Hercules Plaza, 6th Flr., P.O. Box 951
Plaintiff
ImmerVision, Inc.
Represented By
5 Attorneys ListedPanitch Schwarze Belisario & Nadel LLP
Tel: +1 (215) 965-1379
Delaware Corporate Center, 1 Righter Parkway
Panitch Schwarze Belisario & Nadel LLP
Tel: +1 (302) 394-6006
Fax: +1 (215) 965-1331
Delaware Corporate Center, 1 Righter Parkway
Panitch Schwarze Belisario & Nadel LLP
Tel: +1 (215) 965-1261
Delaware Corporate Center, 1 Righter Parkway
Court & Judges
Court
District Court, D. Delaware (ded)
Presiding Judge
Maryellen Noreika
Patents Involved
There is a single patent involved in this case.
| Application Number | Patent Number | External Links |
|---|---|---|
| - | US6844990 |
Docket Entries
COMPLAINT filed with Jury Demand against Apple, Inc. - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ADEDC-3727431.) - filed by ImmerVision, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet)(smg) (Entered: 10/22/2021)
2021-10-22
1
Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (smg) (Entered: 10/22/2021)
2021-10-22
1
Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) US 6,844,990 B2. (smg) (Entered: 10/22/2021)
2021-10-22
1
Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: No Parents or Affiliates Listed filed by ImmerVision, Inc. (smg) (Entered: 10/22/2021)
2021-10-22
1
No Summons Issued. (smg)
2021-10-22
1
No Actions
Case Assigned to Judge Maryellen Noreika. Please include the initials of the Judge (MN) after the case number on all documents filed. (rjb)
2021-10-27
1
No Actions
ORAL ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is referred to Magistrate Judge Christopher J. Burke to hear and resolve all pre-trial matters up to and including expert discovery matters (but not including summary judgment motions, Daubert motions, pre-trial motions in limine or the pre-trial conference), subject to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and any further Order of the Court. All subsequent filings in this action shall be captioned as follows: Civil Action No. 21-1484-MN-CJB. ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 10/28/2021. (dlw) (Entered: 10/28/2021)
2021-10-28
1
Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge
2021-10-28
1
No Actions
Remark: The parties should follow the Court's Standing Order Regarding Courtesy Copies, a copy of which is found on Judge Burkes portion of the District Courts webpage: https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/judge/magistrate-judge-christopher-j-burke (dlb)
2021-10-28
1
No Actions
REMARK: The parties should be aware that the Court encourages the participation of newer attorneys in courtroom proceedings and at oral argument. Please see the Court's Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys, a link to which is provided here for the parties' convenience:http://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/forms/StandingOrder2017.pdf (dlb)
2021-10-28
1
No Actions
Return of Service Executed by ImmerVision, Inc.. Apple, Inc. served on 1/18/2022, answer due 2/8/2022. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 01/18/2022)
2022-01-18
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint to March 10, 2022 - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 02/03/2022)
2022-02-03
1
~Util - Set/Reset Answer Deadline AND SO ORDERED
2022-02-03
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED D.I. 7 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint to March 10, 2022 filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 2/3/2022. (dlb)
2022-02-03
1
No Actions
MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Keith A. Jones - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Simmons, John) (Entered: 02/09/2022)
2022-02-09
1
STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order Staying Case Pending Resolution of Disputes in Related Actions by Apple, Inc.. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 02/10/2022)
2022-02-10
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court has reviewed the parties' proposed stipulation requesting a stay pending the resolution of disputes in certain related actions, (D.I. 9 in Civil Action No. 21-1481-MN-CJB; D.I. 15 in Civil Action No. 21-1733-MN-CJB). After conferring with the District Judge, and in light of the District Judge's related order denying a stay request in those related cases, (D.I. 154 in Civil Action No. 18-1630-MN-CJB; D.I. 152 in Civil Action No. 18-1631-MN-CJB), the Court hereby ORDERS that the proposed stipulation is DENIED. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 2/10/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 02/10/2022)
2022-02-10
1
Oral Order
2022-02-10
1
No Actions
NOTICE of Appearance by Bindu Ann George Palapura on behalf of Apple, Inc. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 02/15/2022)
2022-02-15
1
NOTICE of Appearance by Brandon Ryan Harper on behalf of Apple, Inc. (Harper, Brandon) (Entered: 02/15/2022)
2022-02-15
1
Add Attorneys - PHV only
2022-02-16
1
No Actions
Pro Hac Vice Attorney Keith A. Jones for ImmerVision, Inc. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (apk)
2022-02-16
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED D.I. (8 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Keith A. Jones filed by ImmerVision, Inc.,D.I. (8 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Keith A. Jones filed by ImmerVision, Inc.,and D.I. (14 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Keith A. Jones filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 2/16/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2022-02-16
1
No Actions
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint to March 25, 2022 - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 02/18/2022)
2022-02-18
1
~Util - Set/Reset Answer Deadline AND SO ORDERED
2022-02-22
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED D.I. 13 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaint to March 25, 2022 filed by Apple, Inc.Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 2/2/2022. (dlb)
2022-02-22
1
No Actions
MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Michael T. Pieja, Doug Winnard, Shaun Zhang and Jennifer M. Hartjes of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP - filed by Apple, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 03/24/2022)
2022-03-24
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaints to April 14, 2022 - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 03/24/2022)
2022-03-24
1
SO ORDERED D.I. (13 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 15 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move, or otherwise respond to the Complaints to April 14, 2022 filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/25/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB(mlc)
2022-03-25
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED D.I. (12 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Michael T. Pieja, Doug Winnard, Shaun Zhang and Jennifer M. Hartjes of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP filed by Apple, Inc.. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/5/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2022-04-05
1
No Actions
Pro Hac Vice Attorney Shaun Zhang, Michael T. Pieja, Jennifer M Hartjes, and Doug Winnard for Apple, Inc. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (mpb)
2022-04-06
1
No Actions
Add Attorneys - PHV only
2022-04-06
1
No Actions
Pro Hac Vice Attorney Jennifer M Hartjes for Apple, Inc. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (mpb)
2022-04-07
1
No Actions
Add Attorneys - PHV only
2022-04-07
1
No Actions
MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Moore, David) (Entered: 04/14/2022)
2022-04-14
1
OPENING BRIEF in Support re 16 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Apple, Inc..Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 4/28/2022. (Moore, David) (Entered: 04/14/2022)
2022-04-14
1
Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: No Parents or Affiliates Listed filed by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 04/14/2022)
2022-04-14
1
MOTION REFERRED: 16 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Motion referred to Christopher J. Burke.(dlb)
2022-04-14
1
No Actions
ORAL ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall meet and confer and discuss, in person and/or by telephone, each of the matters listed on Judge Burke's Case Management Checklist ("Checklist"). Within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order, the parties shall jointly file a proposed Scheduling Order, which is consistent with Judge Burke's "Rule 16 Scheduling Order Patent" up through and including paragraph number 16 (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule leading up to but not including the case dispositive motion stage of the case) and that is consistent with paragraphs 15-22 of Judge Noreika's "Patent Scheduling Order - Non-ANDA" (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule from the case dispositive motion stage through post-trial motions); and (ii) a letter, not to exceed three pages, that contains the following: (a) a description of what this case is about; (b) the parties positions regarding any disputes in the proposed Scheduling Order; and (c) a list of the three most significant topics (other than Scheduling Order disputes) discussed during the parties' review of the Checklist items, along with a brief description as to what was discussed as to those topics. Thereafter, the Court may schedule a Case Management Conference/Rule 16 Scheduling Conference to be held with Judge Burke. The Checklist and both Scheduling Orders can be found on Judge Burke's/Judge Noreika's portions of the District Court's website.. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/18/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 04/18/2022)
2022-04-18
1
Oral Order
2022-04-18
1
No Actions
Motions Referred
2022-04-18
1
No Actions
AMENDED COMPLAINT against Apple, Inc.- filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 04/28/2022)
2022-04-28
1
STIPULATION and (Proposed) Order to Extend Time by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 04/28/2022)
2022-04-28
1
~Util - Set Briefing Schedule - open,ans,reply,surreply AND SO ORDERED
2022-04-28
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED AND ~Util - Set Briefing Schedule - open,ans,reply,surreply
2022-04-28
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED D.I. (21 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Stipulation filed by ImmerVision, Inc., (17 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Stipulation filed by ImmerVision, Inc., (31 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Stipulation filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 4/28/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2022-04-28
1
No Actions
ANSWER to Amended Complaint, re: 20 Amended Complaint with Jury Demand by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 05/12/2022)
2022-05-12
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties' to submit a joint proposed Scheduling Order and case-management letter to June 15, 2022 - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 06/01/2022)
2022-06-01
1
SO ORDERED D.I. (18 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 37 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 23 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties' to submit a joint proposed Scheduling Order and case-management letter to June 15, 2022 filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/2/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2022-06-02
1
No Actions
Joint PROPOSED ORDER Scheduling Order by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 06/15/2022)
2022-06-15
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding case summary pursuant to the Court's Order of April 18, 2022 - re (19 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 24 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 39 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Proposed Order. (Attachments: # 1 Checklist)(Moore, David) (Entered: 06/15/2022)
2022-06-15
1
SCHEDULING ORDER: Joinder of Parties due by 5/22/2023. Amended Pleadings due by 5/22/2023. Discovery due by 12/15/2023. Opening Expert Reports due by 1/26/2024. Rebuttal Expert Reports due by 2/26/2024. Claim Construction Opening Brief due by 3/15/2023. Claim Construction Answering Brief due by 4/17/2023. Claim Construction Reply Brief due by 5/1/2023. A Markman Hearing is set for 7/27/2023 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 2A before Judge Christopher J. Burke. A Pretrial Conference is set for 10/21/2024 at 04:30 PM in Courtroom 4A before Judge Maryellen Noreika. A 7 day Jury Trial is set for 10/28/2024 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 4A before Judge Maryellen Noreika. Please see Order for further details and deadlines. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/21/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 06/21/2022)
2022-06-21
1
ORAL ORDER: With the parties having no disputes as to the form of the proposed Scheduling Order (D.I. 41 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 26 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 21 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB), the Court has today entered that Order. To the extent that either party wishes the Court to schedule an in-person or telephonic Case Management Conference at this time, they should so inform the Court by letter. To the extent that the parties do not do so, the Court will not set a conference at this time. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/21/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 06/21/2022)
2022-06-21
1
Oral Order
2022-06-21
1
No Actions
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties to submit a joint Protective Order and Discovery Order to August 4, 2022 - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Harper, Brandon) (Entered: 07/20/2022)
2022-07-20
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Initial Disclosures Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(A) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/21/2022)
2022-07-21
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Initial Disclosures filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 07/21/2022)
2022-07-21
1
SO ORDERED (47 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 28 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 23 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties to submit a joint Protective Order and Discovery Order to August 4, 2022 filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 7/20/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2022-07-21
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's First Set of Requests for Production to Defendant filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/27/2022)
2022-07-27
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties to submit a joint Protective Order and Discovery Order to August 18, 2022 - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 08/04/2022)
2022-08-04
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s First Set Of Interrogatories To Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. (Nos. 1-9); and Defendant Apple Inc.'s First Set Of Requests For Production To Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. (Nos. 1-68) filed by Apple, Inc..(Harper, Brandon) (Entered: 08/05/2022)
2022-08-05
1
SO ORDERED D.I. (27 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 32 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 52 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties to submit a joint Protective Order and Discovery Order to August 18, 2022 filed by Apple, Inc.. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/5/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2022-08-08
1
No Actions
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Plaintiff to Comply with Paragraph 7.a of the June 21, 2022 Scheduling Order to August 29, 2022 - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 08/12/2022)
2022-08-12
1
SO ORDERED D.I. (29 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) (54 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB), (34 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the Plaintiff to Comply with Paragraph 7.a of the June 21, 2022 Scheduling Order to August 29, 2022 filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/15/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB(dlb)
2022-08-15
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Disclosures Pursuant to 7.b of the Scheduling Order - The Identification of Accused Products, Asserted Patents, Damages Model, and Prosecution File History, and (2) Plaintiff's Production of Documents marked IMV0000001 to IMV0000546 filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 08/16/2022)
2022-08-16
1
PROPOSED ORDER Stipulated Discovery Order by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 08/18/2022)
2022-08-18
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties to submit a joint Protective Order to August 25, 2022 - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Harper, Brandon) (Entered: 08/18/2022)
2022-08-18
1
SO ORDERED D.I. 37 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME for the parties to submit a joint Protective Order to August 25, 2022 filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/18/2022. (dlb)
2022-08-18
1
No Actions
Joint PROPOSED ORDER (Protective Order) by Apple, Inc.. (Harper, Brandon) (Entered: 08/25/2022)
2022-08-25
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s First Set of Requests for Production (Nos. 1-38) filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 08/26/2022)
2022-08-26
1
PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/26/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(mlc) (Entered: 08/26/2022)
2022-08-26
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Notice of Service filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 08/30/2022)
2022-08-30
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Second Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc. (No. 10) filed by Apple, Inc..(Harper, Brandon) (Entered: 08/31/2022)
2022-08-31
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Supplemental Identification of Accused Products, Asserted Patents, Damages Model, and Prosecution File History filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 09/19/2022)
2022-09-19
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Supplemental Disclosures Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(A), (2) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Defendant Apple, Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-9), and (3) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Defendant Apple, Inc.'s First Set of Requests for Production (Nos. 1-68) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 09/20/2022)
2022-09-20
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Defendant Apple, Inc.'s Second Set of Interrogatories (No. 10) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 09/30/2022)
2022-09-30
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories to Defendant filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 10/03/2022)
2022-10-03
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding a request for a court order directing the production of a prior settlement agreement. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 10/04/2022)
2022-10-04
1
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Within ten days of this Order, Vivotek Inc.,Vivotek USA Inc., and Vivotek Holdings Inc. shall show cause why the settlement agreement between them and ImmerVision, Inc., dated September 2013, shall not be produced in this litigation under the HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY designation of the Protective Order governing this case. Plaintiff shall provide a copy of this Order to Vivotek Inc. within three days of this Order. If no objection is filed to this Order by Vivotek Inc., Vivotek USA Inc., or Vivotek Holdings Inc. within ten days of this Order, under the HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL-ATTORNEYS EYES ONLY designation of the Protective Order governing this case. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/4/2022. (apk) (Entered: 10/04/2022)
2022-10-04
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendants' Production of Core Technical Documents filed by Apple, Inc..(Harper, Brandon) (Entered: 10/04/2022)
2022-10-04
1
MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Kenneth A. Kuwayti and Karina N. Pundeff of Morrison & Foerster LLP - filed by Apple, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 10/11/2022)
2022-10-11
1
SO ORDERED D.I. 50 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Kenneth A. Kuwayti and Karina N. Pundeff of Morrison & Foerster LLP filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/13/2022. (smg)
2022-10-13
1
No Actions
Pro Hac Vice Attorney Karina N. Pundeff,Kenneth A. Kuwayti for Apple, Inc. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (apk)
2022-10-19
1
No Actions
Add Attorneys - PHV only
2022-10-19
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Production of Documents marked IMV0002093 to IMV0002126 satisfying the October 4, 2022 Order to Show Cause filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 10/20/2022)
2022-10-20
1
NOTICE of Appearance by Keith A. Jones on behalf of ImmerVision, Inc. (Jones, Keith) (Entered: 11/02/2022)
2022-11-02
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Initial Infringement Contentions filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 11/02/2022)
2022-11-02
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses And Objections To Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s First Set Of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-5) [Highly Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only] filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 11/03/2022)
2022-11-03
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Invalidity Contentions, Corresponding Exhibits, and Production of Documents filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 12/09/2022)
2022-12-09
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-5) (Supplemental Response to Interrogatory No. 5) [Highly Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only] filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 12/16/2022)
2022-12-16
1
Joint STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME Claim Construction Issue Identification to 1/11/2023 - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 12/18/2022)
2022-12-18
1
SO ORDERED (52 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 77 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 57 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Joint STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME Claim Construction Issue Identification to 1/11/2023 filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 12/20/2022. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2022-12-20
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Production of Documents marked IMV0002127 to IMV0007800 filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 12/27/2022)
2022-12-27
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Identification of Claim Terms for Construction filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 01/12/2023)
2023-01-12
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Identification of Claim Terms for Construction filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 01/12/2023)
2023-01-12
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Proposed Claim Constructions filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 01/25/2023)
2023-01-25
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Identification of Proposed Claim Constructions filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 01/26/2023)
2023-01-26
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Second Set of Requests for Production to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc. (Nos. 69-74), and Defendant Apple Inc.'s Third Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc. (Nos. 11-12) filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 01/27/2023)
2023-01-27
1
Joint STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to File Joint Claim Construction Chart to 2/16/2023 - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 02/15/2023)
2023-02-15
1
CLAIM Construction Chart by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/24/2023: # 1 Appendix) (dlb). (Entered: 02/16/2023)
2023-02-16
1
NOTICE of Issuance of Subpoena directed to Volpi Manufacturing U.S.A., Co., Inc. by Apple, Inc. (Moore, David) (Entered: 02/23/2023)
2023-02-23
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Defendant's Second Set of Requests for Production, and (2) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Defendant's Third Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 11-12) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/27/2023)
2023-02-27
1
NOTICE of Issuance of Amended Subpoena directed to Volpi Manufacturing U.S.A., Co., Inc. by Apple, Inc. (Moore, David) (Entered: 03/08/2023)
2023-03-08
1
SO ORDERED
2023-03-08
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED (D.I. 64 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, D.I. 84 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, D.I. 59 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Joint STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to File Joint Claim Construction Chart to 2/16/2023 filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/8/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2023-03-08
1
No Actions
Joint Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons and Bindu A. Palapura regarding Joint Request to Amend the Joint Claim Construction Chart filed on February 16, 2023. (Attachments: # 1 Amended Joint Claim Construction Chart)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 03/09/2023)
2023-03-09
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' March 9, 2023 letter, (Civil Action No. 21-1484-MN-CJB, D.I. 69; Civil Action No. 21-1570-MN-CJB, D.I. 64; Civil Action No. 21-1733-MN-CJB, D.I. 89), hereby ORDERS that by no later than March 13, 2023, the parties shall file their Amended Joint Claim Construction Chart separately on the docket.Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/9/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 03/09/2023)
2023-03-09
1
Oral Order
2023-03-09
1
No Actions
CLAIM Construction Chart by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 03/13/2023)
2023-03-13
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' Joint Claim Construction Chart, (Civil Action No. 21-1733, D.I. 91; Civil Action No. 21-1570, D.I. 66; Civil Action No. 21-1484, D.I. 71), hereby ORDERS that any party relying on a construction of "plain and ordinary meaning" shall clearly articulate in its claim construction briefing what it contends is the plain and ordinary meaning. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 3/15/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 03/15/2023)
2023-03-15
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Opening Claim Construction Brief, Declaration of Daniel Reiley, Ph.D., and Exhibits marked A to L filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Simmons, John) (Entered: 03/15/2023)
2023-03-15
1
Oral Order
2023-03-15
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s production of documents marked IMV0007801 to IMV0043326 filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 03/31/2023)
2023-03-31
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Production Of Documents (Bates APL-IMV_00026012 - APL-IMV_00048801) [Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only] filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 04/03/2023)
2023-04-03
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Dr. Daniel Reiley on April 12, 2023 filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 04/03/2023)
2023-04-03
1
STIPULATION to extend time to serve claim construction briefs by Apple, Inc.. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 04/14/2023)
2023-04-14
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responsive Markman Brief filed by Apple, Inc..(Brown, Andrew) (Entered: 04/20/2023)
2023-04-20
1
Joint STIPULATION To Extend Time to Serve Claim Construction Briefs by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 05/03/2023)
2023-05-03
1
[SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Discovery Dispute, Request for Order to Show Cause. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-3, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(Moore, David) (Entered: 05/03/2023)
2023-05-03
1
ORDER To Show Cause Regarding the Shaw License. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/4/23. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(mlc) (Entered: 05/04/2023)
2023-05-04
1
SO ORDERED
2023-05-04
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED D.I. (99 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Stipulation to Extend Time to Serve Claim Construction Briefs filed by ImmerVision, Inc., (74 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Stipulation filed by ImmerVision, Inc., (79 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Stipulation filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/4/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB(mlc)
2023-05-04
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Claim Construction Reply Brief, and the Declaration of Daniel Reiley, Ph.D. in Support of ImmerVision's Claim Reply Brief filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 05/05/2023)
2023-05-05
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Order to Show Cause Regarding The Shaw License filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 05/05/2023)
2023-05-05
1
REDACTED VERSION of (100 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB; D.I. 80 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB; D.I. 75 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Letter by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-3)(Moore, David) Modified on 5/10/2023 (dlb). (Entered: 05/10/2023)
2023-05-10
1
[SEALED] Request to Seal and Letter RESPONSE to 81 Order to Show Cause filed by Venson M Shaw, Steven M Shaw. (dlb) (Additional attachment(s) added on 5/18/2023: # 1 Letter Response to Order, # 2 Mailing envelope) (dlb). Modified on 5/22/2023 (dlb) - Settlement and License Agreement enclosed "in Camera". (Entered: 05/18/2023)
2023-05-17
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed Venson Shaw and Steven Shaw's ("the Shaws") response to the Court's order to show cause ("Letter"), (Civil Action No. 21-1484-MN-CJB, D.I. 85; Civil Action No. 21-1570-MN-CJB, D.I. 83; Civil Action No. 21-1733-MN-CJB, D.I. 108), hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) Pursuant to the District of Delaware CM/ECF Procedure G, the Shaws shall file with the Court a redacted version of their Letter within 7 days after the filing of the original sealed document.; (2) By no later than May 25, 2023, Defendant Apple, Inc. shall file with the Court an answering letter brief, not to exceed three single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining its opposition to the Letter. By no later than June 1, 2023, the Shaws may file with the Court a reply letter brief, not to exceed one single-spaced page, in no less than 12-point font.; (3) By no later than June 1, 2023, Apple, Inc. shall file on behalf of both parties a one-page motion with respect to this issue.; and (4) The parties should consult and follow Judge Burke's "Guidelines for Discovery Disputes," which is found in the "Guidelines" tab on Judge Burke's portion of the District Court's website. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 5/18/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 05/18/2023)
2023-05-18
1
Oral Order
2023-05-18
1
No Actions
Remark
2023-05-18
1
No Actions
Remark: The Court's Oral Order issued today was emailed to Mr. Venson Shaw and Mr. Steven Shaw. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2023-05-18
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Surreply Markman Brief filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 05/23/2023)
2023-05-23
1
RESPONSE to D.I. 86 Oral Order and Request for D.I. 85 to be unsealed filed by Steven M Shaw, Venson M Shaw. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Envelope)(mkr) (Entered: 05/25/2023)
2023-05-24
1
(SEALED) Letter Motion to Judge Burke filed "IN CAMERA" requesting permission to Redact the Settlement Agreement filed by Venson Shaw and Steven Shaw with enclosed proposed redactions. (mkr) (Main Document 90 replaced on 5/26/2023) (dlb). Modified on 5/26/2023 (dlb). (Entered: 05/25/2023)
2023-05-24
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Second Set of Requests for Production to Defendant, (2) Plaintiff's Second Set of Interrogatories to Defendant, and (3) Plaintiff's First Set of Requests for Admissions to Defendant filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 05/25/2023)
2023-05-25
1
Exhibit to a Document
2023-05-25
1
Redacted Document
2023-05-25
1
[SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Apple's response to the Shaw's response to the Court's Order to Show Cause - re (108 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Response to Order, (109 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 86 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 84 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Oral Order,,,,, (85 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Response to Order, (83 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Response to Order. (Moore, David) (Entered: 05/25/2023)
2023-05-25
1
Document Unsealed
2023-05-26
1
No Actions
Document Unsealed D.I. 85 Response to Order, unsealed per Letter at D.I. 89 - no redactions requested. (dlb)
2023-05-26
1
No Actions
(UNSEALED) Reply Letter to Judge Burke from Venson Shaw and Steven Shaw regarding Letter at D.I. 93 - re 93 Letter (Redacted to remove personal identifiers). (dlb) Modified on 6/5/2023 (dlb). (Entered: 05/30/2023)
2023-05-30
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of [Sealed] Letter To The Honorable Christopher J. Burke From David E. Moore Regarding Apple's Response To The Shaw's Response To The Court's Order To Show Cause filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 05/30/2023)
2023-05-30
1
REDACTED VERSION of (116 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 95 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 93 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Letter, by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 06/01/2023)
2023-06-01
1
Joint MOTION [Joint Motion to Resolve Discovery Dispute re Order to Show Cause] re (109 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 86 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 84 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Oral Order,,,,, - filed by Apple, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 06/01/2023)
2023-06-01
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding response to the Shaws' letter to the Court dated May 22, 2023, and entered on the docket on May 24, 2023 - re (90 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Letter, (113 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Letter, (92 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Letter,. (Moore, David) (Entered: 06/01/2023)
2023-06-01
1
NOTICE of Filing of Multi-Media Materials in Electronic Format with the Office of the Clerk by ImmerVision, Inc. (Jones, Keith) (Entered: 06/02/2023)
2023-06-02
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding enclosure of Defendant's Technology Tutorial. (Moore, David) (Entered: 06/02/2023)
2023-06-02
1
JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEF filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 06/02/2023)
2023-06-02
1
Joint APPENDIX re 101 Joint Claim Construction Brief by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Tab 1 - March 14, 2023 Declaration of Daniel Reiley and Exhibits A to L, # 2 Tab 2 - May 5, 2023 Declaration of Daniel Reiley and Exhibit M, # 3 Tab 3 - Exhibit 1 to Exhibit 15)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 06/02/2023)
2023-06-02
1
MULTI MEDIA DOCUMENT filed by ImmerVision, Inc. in the form of a 1 flash drive. Filing related to (99 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Notice (Other), (104 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Notice (Other), (122 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Notice (Other). (Media on file in Clerk's Office). Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 06/02/2023)
2023-06-02
1
MULTI MEDIA DOCUMENT filed by Apple, Inc. in the form of a 2 Flash drives. Filing related to (123 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 105 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 100 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Letter. (Media on file in Clerk's Office). Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 06/02/2023)
2023-06-02
1
Letter to Judge Burke and Clerk's Office from Venson Shaw and Steven Shaw regarding No redactions requested for D.I. 94 - re 94 Letter. (dlb) (Entered: 06/05/2023)
2023-06-02
1
Multi Media Document
2023-06-02
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Production of Documents marked IMV0043327 to IMV0043411 filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 06/08/2023)
2023-06-08
1
STATEMENT Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Comments on Defendant Apple Inc.'s Technology Tutorial by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 06/09/2023)
2023-06-09
1
STATEMENT [Defendant Apple Inc.'s Comments on Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Technology Tutorial] by Apple, Inc.. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 06/09/2023)
2023-06-09
1
Joint Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Joint Request for a Discovery/Protective Order Dispute Teleconference. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 06/15/2023)
2023-06-15
1
MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 06/15/2023)
2023-06-15
1
OPENING BRIEF in Support re 110 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Apple, Inc..Answering Brief/Response due date per Local Rules is 6/29/2023. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 06/15/2023)
2023-06-15
1
[SEALED] Letter to Judge Burke and Clerk's Office from Venson Shaw and Steven Shaw - no redactions to "letter to show cause". Letter is labeled as filed under seal and contains copies of a letter dated 6/13/2023 that "disagrees with Apple response at D.I. 98." Filing also contains Affidavit which contains personal identifiers of Messers. Shaw, and a Proposed Order to Show Cause which also appears to be filed at D.I. 114 in this case. (dlb) (Entered: 06/22/2023)
2023-06-20
1
Joint STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Extend Time by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 06/21/2023)
2023-06-21
1
ORAL ORDER Setting Videoconference: The Court, having reviewed the parties' June 15, 2023 letter requesting a discovery dispute teleconference regarding one dispute, hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) A Videoconference utilizing the Microsoft Teams platform is set for August 7, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. before Judge Christopher J. Burke.; (2) By no later than July 5, 2023, Plaintiff shall file with the Court a letter, not to exceed three single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the issues in dispute and its position on those issues. By no later than July 12, 2023, Defendant shall file a letter, not to exceed three single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining its reasons for its opposition. By no later than July 19, 2023, Plaintiff shall file a reply letter brief, not to exceed one single-spaced page, in no less than 12-point font.; (3) By no later than July 19, 2023, the parties shall send an e-mail to the Court's Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Benyo, indicating the names and e-mail addresses of all individuals who will participate in the hearing.; (4) The parties shall jointly file a Motion for Videoconference to Resolve Discovery Dispute.; (5) The parties should consult and follow Judge Burke's "Guidelines for Discovery Disputes," which is found in the "Guidelines" tab on Judge Burke's portion of the District Courts website.; and (6) The Court may choose to resolve the disputes prior to the videoconference and will, in that event, cancel the hearing (however, if any party advises the Court in advance that a newer attorney will argue the dispute, see Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys, https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/StandingOrder2017.pdf, then the Court will go forward with the hearing). Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/21/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 06/21/2023)
2023-06-21
1
[SEALED] Letter to Judge Burke, from Venson Shaw and Steven Shaw, regarding disagreements to D.I. 98 letter. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Venson Shaw, # 2 Affidavit of Steven M. Shaw, # 3 Text of Proposed Order)(apk) (Entered: 06/22/2023)
2023-06-21
1
SO ORDERED D.I. 112 Stipulation to Extend Time for briefing filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/21/2023. (dlb)
2023-06-21
1
No Actions
Order Setting Briefing Schedule - open, ans, reply, surreply AND SO ORDERED
2023-06-21
1
No Actions
Order Setting Videoconference
2023-06-21
1
No Actions
ORAL ORDER: The Court notes as follows: (1) The parties were required by the Scheduling Order to each file concurrently with the Joint Claim Construction Chart a "Motion for Claim Construction[.]" (Civil Action No. 21-1484, D.I. 26 at para. 13; Civil Action No. 21-1570, D.I. 21 at para. 13; Civil Action No. 21-1733, D.I. 41 at para. 13) The parties have not done so. Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that by no later than June 27, 2023, the parties shall each file the required Motion for Claim Construction.; and (2) The parties were also required by the Scheduling Order to submit a joint letter detailing, among other things, whether the parties request leave to present live testimony at the Markman hearing and the amount of time the parties are requesting for argument. (Civil Action No. 21-1484, D.I. 26 at para. 15; Civil Action No. 21-1570, D.I. 21 at para. 15; Civil Action No. 21-1733, D.I. 41 at para. 15) The parties have not complied with this requirement either. Therefore, it is hereby ORDERED that by no later than June 30, 2023, the parties shall submit this joint letter to the Court. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 6/26/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(mlc) (Entered: 06/26/2023)
2023-06-26
1
Oral Order
2023-06-26
1
No Actions
MOTION for Claim Construction re 71 Claim Construction Chart - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Simmons, John) (Entered: 06/27/2023)
2023-06-27
1
MOTION for Claim Construction re (71 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Claim Construction Chart, (91 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Claim Construction Chart, (66 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Claim Construction Chart - filed by Apple, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Moore, David) (Entered: 06/27/2023)
2023-06-27
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s First Set of Requests for Admission (Nos. 1-7) [Highly Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only]; Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Second Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 6-7); and Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Second Set of Requests for Production (Nos. 39-44) filed by Apple, Inc..(Brown, Andrew) (Entered: 06/27/2023)
2023-06-27
1
Joint Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons and David E. Moore regarding the July 27, 2023, Claim Construction Hearing. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 06/29/2023)
2023-06-29
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/05/2023)
2023-07-05
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/05/2023)
2023-07-05
2
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/05/2023)
2023-07-05
2
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/05/2023)
2023-07-05
2
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/05/2023)
2023-07-05
2
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/05/2023)
2023-07-05
2
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Discovery Dispute. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/05/2023)
2023-07-05
2
Joint MOTION for Videoconference to Resolve Discovery Dispute - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/05/2023)
2023-07-05
1
ANSWERING BRIEF in Opposition re 110 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by ImmerVision, Inc..Reply Brief due date per Local Rules is 7/17/2023. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/10/2023)
2023-07-10
1
REQUEST for Oral Argument by ImmerVision, Inc. re 110 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings . (Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/11/2023)
2023-07-11
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Supplemental Responses and Objections to Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-5) [Highly Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only] filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 07/12/2023)
2023-07-12
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding responsive discovery dispute letter brief - re (122 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Letter, (141 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Letter, (121 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Letter. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-C)(Moore, David) (Entered: 07/12/2023)
2023-07-12
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding responsive discovery dispute letter brief - re (122 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) Letter, (141 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB) Letter, (121 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) Letter. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A-C)(Moore, David) (Entered: 07/12/2023)
2023-07-12
2
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' June 29, 2023 letter regarding the Markman hearing ("Letter"), (Civil Action No. 21-1484-MN-CJB, D.I. 120; Civil Action No. 21-1570-MN-CJB, D.I. 121; Civil Action No. 21-1733-MN-CJB, D.I. 140), hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) The Court hereby ADOPTS the parties' proposal regarding time allocation. Three hours will be allocated for argument, to be split equally between the parties.; (2) The Court also hereby ADOPTS the parties' proposal regarding the order of terms and which side will present argument first for each term.; (3) On or before July 24, 2023, Delaware and lead counsel for the parties shall meet and confer and file an amended joint claim construction chart that sets forth the terms/issues that remain in dispute. The meet and confer shall focus on an attempt to reach agreement on any remaining disputed terms/issues where possible and on an attempt to focus the dispute over the remaining terms/issues in light of the parties' claim construction briefing. By no later July 24, 2023, the parties shall also file a letter, identifying by name each individual who participated in this meet and confer, when and how that meet and confer occurred and how long it lasted. If no agreements on constructions have been reached or if no dispute has been narrowed on the meet and confer, the letter shall so state and the parties need not file an amended joint claim construction chart.; and (4) In the July 24 letter, the parties should also let the Court know if there is joint agreement to conduct the Markman hearing via videoconference. If there is joint agreement, the Court will do so; if there is not joint agreement, then the hearing will go forward as an in-person hearing in Courtroom 2A. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 7/17/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 07/17/2023)
2023-07-17
1
REPLY BRIEF re 110 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Main Document 128 replaced on 7/18/2023) (dlb). (Entered: 07/17/2023)
2023-07-17
1
Oral Order
2023-07-17
1
No Actions
REQUEST for Oral Argument by Apple, Inc. re 110 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings . (Moore, David) (Entered: 07/18/2023)
2023-07-18
1
- CORRECTING ENTRY
2023-07-18
1
No Actions
CORRECTING ENTRY: PDF at D.I. 128 has been replaced at the request of the filer. (dlb)
2023-07-18
1
No Actions
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding reply discovery dispute letter brief - re 113 Order Setting Videoconference,,,,,,,. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/19/2023)
2023-07-19
1
Joint Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons and David E. Moore regarding the July 27, 2023, Claim Construction Hearing - re 127 Oral Order,,,,,,,. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/21/2023)
2023-07-21
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' July 21, 2023 letter, hereby ORDERS that the July 27, 2023 Markman hearing will be held in Courtroom 2A. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 7/25/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 07/25/2023)
2023-07-25
1
MOTION [Apple Inc.'s Motion and Proposed Order Granting Limited Exemption From the Standing Order Regarding Personal Electronic Devices] - filed by Apple, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 07/25/2023)
2023-07-25
1
ORDER granting D.I. (133) in case 21-cv-01484 and D.I. (130) in case 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB and D.I. (149) in case 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB [Apple Inc.'s Motion and Proposed Order Granting Limited Exemption From the Standing Order Regarding Personal Electronic Devices]. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 7/25/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 07/25/2023)
2023-07-25
1
Oral Order
2023-07-25
1
No Actions
Markman Hearing
2023-07-27
1
No Actions
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Christopher J. Burke - Markman Hearing held on 7/27/2023. The Court heard argument from the parties and took the matter under advisement. (Clerk: S. Simonetti) Appearances: J. Simmons, K. Jones, D. Butler for Plaintiff; J. Hartjes, M. Pieja, S. Zhang, D. Winnard, B. Palapura for Defendant. (Court Reporter Deanna Warner) Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2023-07-27
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Third Set of Requests for Production to Defendant, and (2) Plaintiff's Third Set of Interrogatories to Defendant filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 08/01/2023)
2023-08-01
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties' joint motion to resolve a protective order dispute, (D.I. 122 in Civil Action No. 21-1484-MN-CJB, which will be the only case's docket index that is cited herein), and the briefing related thereto, (D.I. 121; D.I. 126; D.I. 130), hereby ORDERS that Defendant has demonstrated good cause such that its position should prevail and that its proposed Supplemental Protective Order ("SPO"), (D.I. 121, ex. F), should be entered. Defendant did here what too few parties in discovery disputes do: it made a detailed factual record, supported by multiple sworn declarations, that strongly supported its arguments. That is, Defendant has demonstrated that the "highly technical details necessary to fabricate [its] proprietary... lens designs" are, "in effect, the source code of lenses" and "are as commercially sensitive as any other form of source code[,]" such that they should receive the heightened form of protection set out in the SPO. (D.I. 126 at 1) It did so by showing that: (1) the lens prescriptions at issue amount to extremely precise, detailed information about a lens, including its physical dimensions, the arrangement of its optical elements, its materials and its overall layout; (2) these prescriptions are far more detailed than schematics, diagrams, specifications or other technical documents, as a person with knowledge of the latter types of documents could not reverse engineer the accused lens designs; (3) yet if one had access to the prescriptions at issue, they would provide a level of detail that would allow a lens designer to model or reconstruct or replicate the lens itself, which is otherwise incredibly difficult to do in light of the complexity of these designs; (4) the lens prescriptions at issue are very valuable assets in the mobile device industry, as they are the product of significant investments of time and resources resulting from years of research and development by multiple engineers and teams at Defendant; and (5) the files containing these prescriptions are treated as highly sensitive and proprietary materials at Defendant, they are subject to access controls at Defendant beyond what is generally applicable to confidential or proprietary material (including that they are stored in access-controlled repositories and access to them is granted only on a need-to-know-basis to a limited subset of Defendant employees), and they are shared only on an as-needed basis with vendors, who have contractual obligations to maintain their secrecy. (Id., ex. A at paras. 13-17; id., ex. B at paras. 6-9) In cases like this, involving discovery materials that are akin to software-based source code, our Court has blessed the type of heightened protections for such material sought here by Defendant. See Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft Zur Forderung Der Angewandten Forschung E.V. v. Sirius XM Radio, Inc., Civil Action No. 17-184-JFB-SRF, 2017 WL 4564742, at *2 (D. Del. Oct. 13, 2017) (defining "source code" to include "hardware-based code," because the hardware-based code "identifie[d] how the [circuit] chips themselves are made") (citing cases); cf. Karl Storz Endoscopy-Am., Inc. v. Stryker Corp., Case No. 14-cv-00876-RS (JSC), 2016 WL 3129215, at *11-12 (N.D. Cal. June 2, 2016) (agreeing with defendant that the design history file for its camera system is "akin to source code because it sets forth how the system operates, and that competitors could use the information to design or modify products that replace [defendant's] products[,]" and ordering that the materials at issue triggered a prosecution bar, the highest tier of protection discussed in the protective order at issue). The Court also finds that the burden to Plaintiff of abiding by these protections is not undue, in part because it will hold Defendant to its promise to make the materials available to Plaintiff not only in Chicago (where Defendant's counsel is located), but also in Santa Monica (not far from Plaintiff's expert), in Delaware (near Plaintiff's counsel) or wherever else the parties can mutually agree on. (D.I. 126 at 3; D.I. 130 at 1) The videoconference previously scheduled for August 7, 2023 is hereby CANCELED. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/4/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 08/04/2023)
2023-08-04
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Amended Initial Disclosures filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 08/04/2023)
2023-08-04
1
Oral Order
2023-08-04
1
No Actions
Interim STATUS REPORT (Joint) by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 08/07/2023)
2023-08-07
1
SUPPLEMENTAL PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/8/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 08/08/2023)
2023-08-08
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Second Supplemental Disclosures Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(A) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 08/11/2023)
2023-08-11
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Supplemental Responses And Objections To Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s First Set Of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-5) [Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only] filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 08/16/2023)
2023-08-16
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court has reviewed the joint discovery dispute motion ("Motion") filed by Defendant and by third parties Venson and Steven Shaw ("the Shaws"), via which Defendant requests that the Court enter an order to show cause permitting Defendant to produce a license agreement ("Agreement") between it, the Shaws and Sony Corp. (an entity that has already agreed to production) to Plaintiff, (D.I. 97, in Civil Action No. 21-1484-MN-CJB, the only case docket that will be cited herein). It has also reviewed the briefing related to the Motion. (D.I. 80; D.I. 85; D.I. 93; D.I. 94) Having done so, and understanding that the Shaws oppose Defendant's request, the Court ORDERS that Defendant's request is GRANTED and that the Agreement shall be produced. The Shaws object to such production on a few grounds, none of which are persuasive. First, they argue that the Agreement is not responsive to Plaintiff's RFP No. 22 nor relevant to the subject matter of this litigation. (D.I. 85 at 1-2) But the RFP's language is broad (seeking license agreements of Defendant "concerning" "the wide-angle or panoramic image capture capabilities of any product"), (D.I. 80, ex. 1), and it is undisputed that the Shaws' patent covered by the Agreement relates to "image sensors used to capture images[,]" (D.I. 80 at 2), which are components that can be said to "concern[]" a camera's image capture capabilities, (D.I. 93 at 1). Moreover, such an Agreement could be relevant to damages in this case, since potentially comparable licenses may come in many different flavors, and often parties attempt to utilize a license from the field of the invention in order to argue about relevant royalty rates (even if the license relates to technology that is not on all fours with every aspect of the claimed invention). Second, the Shaws suggest that the Agreement is not relevant or need not be produced because it is not a "core technical document." (D.I. 85 at 1-2; D.I. 94 at 1) But as Defendant correctly notes, (D.I. 93 at 2), core technical documents are only one type of relevant discovery in this case (one that happens to be called out by the Scheduling Order). Other types of relevant discovery may also be sought via a RFP (as with RFP No. 22 here). And third, the Shaws argue that Section 7.1(iii) of the Agreement prohibits the production of the Agreement in circumstances like these. (D.I. 85 at 2; D.I. 94 at 1) Of course, even were the Shaws correct as to Section 7.1(iii)'s meaning, that still would be no bar to production. See I.E.E. Int'l Elecs. & Engineering, S.A. v. TK Holdings, Inc., Case No. 10-13487, 2013 WL 12183637, at *1 (E.D. Mich. June 24, 2013). But the Court agrees with Defendant, (D.I. 93 at 1-2), that Section 7.1(iii) actually does permit disclosure of the Agreement by Defendant (after provision of prior notice to the Shaws, which has been afforded here). The Shaws appear to read Section 7.1(iii) as only allowing disclosure in a case being litigated between the Parties to the Agreement (e.g., between the Shaws and Defendant). (D.I. 85 at 2; D.I. 94 at 1) But that reading is not supported by the Agreement's text. Section 7.1(iii) covers what occurs "during the course of litigation"; were the Shaws' reading correct, one would have expected the subsection to instead read "during the course of litigation between the [Agreement's] Parties" (a group that includes only Defendant, the Shaws and/or Sony). And Section 7.1(iii) refers to "litigating parties" when describing how and to whom the Agreement will be produced during litigation, not simply "the Parties" to the Agreement. Therefore, in accordance with Section 7.1(iii), Defendant shall produce the Agreement to Plaintiff in the manner set out in Defendant's reply letter. (D.I. 93 at 2). Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/22/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 08/22/2023)
2023-08-22
1
Oral Order
2023-08-22
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Final Supplemental Identification Of Invalidity References filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 08/25/2023)
2023-08-25
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Final Identification of Accused Products, Asserted Patents, Damages Model, and Prosecution File History filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 08/28/2023)
2023-08-28
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Second Amended Initial Disclosures filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 08/30/2023)
2023-08-30
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses And Objections To Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Third Set Of Interrogatories (No. 8), and Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses And Objections To Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Third Set Of Requests For Production (Nos. 45-48) filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 08/30/2023)
2023-08-30
1
MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Moore, David) (Entered: 09/12/2023)
2023-09-12
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding motion to stay pending inter partes review - re (147 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 163 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 144 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1-4)(Moore, David) (Entered: 09/12/2023)
2023-09-12
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Supplemental Responses and Objections to Defendant Apple Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-9), and (2) Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Supplemental Responses and Objections to Defendant Apple Inc.'s Third Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 11-12) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 09/15/2023)
2023-09-15
1
NOTICE requesting Clerk to remove Brandon R. Harper as co-counsel. Reason for request: no longer with the firm of Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP. (Moore, David) (Entered: 09/18/2023)
2023-09-18
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s response to Defendant Apple Inc.'s letter requesting to stay - re 148 Letter,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Simmons, John) (Entered: 09/19/2023)
2023-09-19
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Supplemental Responses And Objections To Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Second Set Of Interrogatories (Nos. 6-7) [Highly Confidential Attorneys' Eyes Only] filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 09/20/2023)
2023-09-20
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Fourth Set of Interrogatories to Defendant filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 09/22/2023)
2023-09-22
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Keith A. Jones regarding request for the scheduling of a teleconference - re 147 MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review. (Jones, Keith) (Entered: 09/25/2023)
2023-09-25
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding reply letter brief to motion to stay pending inter partes review - re (147 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 163 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 144 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB) MOTION to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 5-8)(Moore, David) (Entered: 09/25/2023)
2023-09-25
1
ORAL ORDER Setting Videoconference: The Court hereby ORDERS that a videoconference to hear argument on Defendant's Motion to Stay Pending IPR ("Motion"), (D.I. 147 in Civil Action No. 21-1484-MN-CJB; D.I. 163 in 21-1733-MN-CJB; D.I. 144 in 21-1570-MN-CJB,), is set for October 16, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. before Judge Christopher J. Burke via the Microsoft Teams platform. By no later than October 6, 2023, the parties shall send an e-mail to the Court's Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Benyo, indicating the names and e-mail addresses of all individuals who will participate in the hearing. The Court may choose to resolve the Motion prior to the videoconference and will, in that event, cancel the videoconference (however, if any party advises the Court in advance that a newer attorney will argue the dispute, see Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys, https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/StandingOrder2017.pdf, then the Court will go forward with the conference). Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/26/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb) (Entered: 09/26/2023)
2023-09-26
1
Order Setting Hearing on Motion AND Order Setting Videoconference
2023-09-26
1
No Actions
STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order Staying Cases Pending Resolution of Disputes in Related Actions by Apple, Inc.. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 10/04/2023)
2023-10-04
1
Order Staying Case AND SO ORDERED
2023-10-04
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED Stipulations Staying Cases Pending Resolution of Disputes in Related Actions, re (173 in 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB, 154 in 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 157 in 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB) filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/4/2023. Associated Cases: 1:21-cv-01484-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01570-MN-CJB, 1:21-cv-01733-MN-CJB(dlb)
2023-10-04
1
No Actions
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the briefs for today's videoconference, hereby advises the parties that they should be prepared to discuss the following during the conference: (1) the extent to which the purported invention in claim 21 of the 990 patent can be said to be substantively different from or similar to that in claim 27 of the patent; (2) the extent to which the Section 102/103 art at issue in the 990 IPR will be similar to or different than the art at issue in this case regarding validity-related issues; (3) the extent to which the PTAB is expected to construe terms that are found in claim 21 during the 990 IPR; and (4) if this case proceeded forward, and if the 990 IPR ended with some claims remaining patentable, the extent to which amongst the two related cases multiple witnesses would need to be deposed twice, or multiple sets of document discovery regarding alleged infringement of the 990 patent would need to be searched for and produced, or multiple summary judgment and Daubert hearings related to the 990 patent would need to be held. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/16/2023. (mlc) (Entered: 10/16/2023)
2023-10-16
1
Oral Order
2023-10-16
1
No Actions
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Christopher J. Burke - Hearing on Defendants Motion to Stay held on 10/16/2023. The Court heard the parties' arguments regarding Defendant's Motion to Stay. (D.I. 147) The Court took the matter under advisement. (Clerk: A. Herman)Appearances: D. Butler and K. Jones for Plaintiff; J. Hartjes, D. Moore, M. Pieja, T. Terhufen and S. Zhang for Defendant. (Court Reporter Deanna Warner) (dlb)
2023-10-16
1
No Actions
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed Defendant's Motion to Stay Pending Inter Partes Review ("IPR") ("Motion"), (D.I. 147), and the briefing related thereto, (D.I. 148; D.I. 151; D.I. 155), having held a videoconference hearing on the Motion on October 16, 2023, and having considered the three stay-related factors, hereby ORDERS that the Motion is GRANTED and the case is STAYED pending completion of the instituted IPR proceeding related to the 990 patent (the "990 patent IPR"), for the reasons that follow: (1) The Motion comes to the Court in a somewhat unusual procedural posture. In this case, Plaintiff is asserting infringement solely of claim 21 of the 990 patent. In a separate case before this Court, Civil Action No. 21-1733-MN-CJB (the "1733 action"), Plaintiff is asserting infringement of other claims of the 990 patent. All of the claims of the 990 patent that are asserted in the 1733 action are at issue in the 990 patent IPR; as a result, the parties agreed that the 1733 action should be stayed. But claim 21 is not at issue in the 990 patent IPR; in light of that, and in light of the fact that claim 21 has been asserted on its own in a stand-alone civil action, Plaintiff resists a stay here.; (2) With regard to the simplification of issues factor, if the PTAB ultimately concludes that all asserted claims at issue in the 990 patent IPR are invalid (i.e., what Defendant thinks will happen), then it appears that staying the case in the interval will not have simplified much. That is in part because Plaintiff's counsel convinced the Court during the hearing that it is unlikely that the PTAB will address any claim construction or invalidity matter in the 990 patent IPR that is likely to be at play in this case as to claim 21. On the other hand, if the PTO does not invalidate the claims at issue in the 990 patent IPR (i.e., what Plaintiff thinks will happen), then staying this case in the interval will probably have simplified the proceedings here somewhat. That is because absent a stay, there will likely be some depositions of at least Defendant's personnel that would have been taken in this case and then would need to be taken again in the 1733 action (in light of the fact that different accused products are at issue in the 1733 action, as compared to this action). (D.I. 155 at 2) Additionally, absent a stay in this scenario, two rounds of summary judgment and Daubert briefing/hearings would need to be held (one in this action and one in the 1733 action) -- as opposed to one combined summary judgment/Daubert process. Plus, since the PTAB's Final Written Decision in the 990 patent IPR is due in late summer 2024 (prior to the October 2024 trial scheduled in this case), if the PTAB upheld the claims at issue in that IPR, then no doubt this case would need to then be paused anyway, so that the 1733 action could catch up to it. With the prospect for simplification wavering between "very little" (if one outcome occurs at the PTAB) and "some real amount" (if the other outcome occurs), the Court finds this factor to either slightly favor a stay, or to be neutral. Cf. Kaavo Inc. v. Cognizant Tech. Sols. Corp., Civil Action No. 14-1192-LPS-CJB, Civil Action No. 14-1193-LPS-CJB, 2015 WL 1737476, at *2-3 (D. Del. Apr. 9, 2015) (noting that a court must assess all of the possible outcomes of the proceeding that the case would be stayed in favor of, not just the potential outcome most favorable to the party seeking a stay).; (3) With regard to the second "status of the case" factor, at the time of the Motion's filing: (a) the case had proceeded through a good bit of document discovery, but no depositions had been taken; (b) a Markman hearing was held, but no Markman decision has issued; and (c) the expert discovery, summary judgment and pre-trial phases were still a ways away. Moreover, other than addressing a protective order dispute, (D.I. 136), and a discovery dispute, (D.I. 142), and holding the Markman hearing, the Court has not had to expend significant resources on this case yet. Thus, with the case being in about the middle of its schedule, and with the Court having invested somewhat less time in it than in the typical patent case of this age, the status of the case factor is neutral. See WSOU Invs., LLC v. Netgear, Inc., Civil Action No. 21-1117-MN-CJB, Civil Action No. 21-1120-MN-CJB, 2022 WL 17337924, at *1 (D. Del. Nov. 30, 2022) (concluding the same, in a patent case at a similar stage to this one).; (4) Lastly, the undue prejudice factor surely favors a stay. It is undisputed that the parties are not competitors. (D.I. 148 at 3) Additionally, the 990 patent has expired, and so only money damages are at stake here regarding past alleged infringement; Plaintiff can capture those damages just as well in 2025 as it could in 2024. Indeed, Plaintiff did not even address this factor in its answering brief. (D.I. 151); and (5) In the end, with a stay allowing the Court and the parties to only have to address certain 990 patent-related issues one time (as opposed to potentially twice), and with no undue prejudice befalling Plaintiff in the event of a stay, Defendant's Motion should be granted. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/17/2023. (dlb) (Entered: 10/17/2023)
2023-10-17
1
ORAL ORDER: In light of the Court's order to stay this case, the Court hereby ORDERS that each of the following pending motions is DENIED without prejudice to renew, if and when the stay is lifted: (1) Plaintiff's Motion for Claim Construction, (D.I. 117), (2) Defendant's Motion for Claim Construction, (D.I. 118), and (3) Defendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, (D.I. 110). Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/17/2023. (dlb) (Entered: 10/17/2023)
2023-10-17
1
Order Staying Case
2023-10-17
1
No Actions
Oral Order
2023-10-17
1
No Actions
Motion Hearing
2023-10-17
1
No Actions
Official Transcript of Motion to Stay held on 10/16/23 before Judge Christopher Burke. Court Reporter Deanna Warner, Email: deanna_warner@ded.uscourts.gov. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or order/purchased through the Court Reporter before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date, it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 11/22/2023. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 12/4/2023. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 1/30/2024. (Warner, Deanna) (Entered: 11/01/2023)
2023-11-01
1
NOTICE requesting Clerk to remove Shaun Zhang as co-counsel. Reason for request: no longer with the firm of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 05/24/2024)
2024-05-24
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Request to Lift the Stay in Case No. 21-cv-1484-MN-CJB. (Simmons, John) (Entered: 08/14/2024)
2024-08-14
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed Plaintiff's August 14, 2024 letter, (D.I. 163 ), seeking to lift the stay in this case, hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) By no later than August 22, 2024, Plaintiff shall file with the Court a one-page "Motion to Lift Stay."; and (2) By no later than August 22, 2024, Plaintiff shall file with the Court a letter, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining why the stay should be lifted. By no later than August 29, 2024, Defendant shall file with the Court a letter, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the reasons for its opposition. By no later than September 5, 2024, Plaintiff shall file with the Court a reply letter brief, not to exceed one (1) single-spaced page, in no less than 12-point font. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 8/15/2024. (smg) (Entered: 08/15/2024)
2024-08-15
1
Oral Order
2024-08-15
1
No Actions
MOTION to Lift Stay - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Simmons, John) (Entered: 08/20/2024)
2024-08-20
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Plaintiff's Motion to Lift Stay - re 165 MOTION to Lift Stay . (Simmons, John) (Main Document 166 replaced on 8/20/2024) (cdd). (Entered: 08/20/2024)
2024-08-20
1
- CORRECTING ENTRY
2024-08-20
1
No Actions
CORRECTING ENTRY: Letter filed at D.I. 166 has been replaced per counsel's request. (cdd)
2024-08-20
1
No Actions
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Lift Stay - re 166 Letter, 165 MOTION to Lift Stay . (Moore, David) (Entered: 08/29/2024)
2024-08-29
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from John D. Simmons regarding Plaintiff's Reply in Support of its Motion to Lift Stay - re 165 MOTION to Lift Stay . (Simmons, John) (Entered: 09/05/2024)
2024-09-05
1
ORAL ORDER: With regard to Plaintiff's Motion to Lift Stay ("motion"), (D.I. 165 ), the Court notes for the parties that it will plan to resolve the motion on the papers, unless: (1) it determines after reviewing the briefing that oral argument is needed; or (2) any party advises the Court in advance that, were argument to be set, a newer attorney will argue the disputes, see Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/StandingOrder2017.pdf. If either of those circumstances, occurs, then the Court will schedule oral argument on the motion in the future. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/9/2024. (smg) (Entered: 09/10/2024)
2024-09-09
1
Oral Order
2024-09-10
1
No Actions
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed Plaintiff's motion to lift the stay in this case ("Motion"), (D.I. 165 ), the briefing related thereto, (D.I. 166 -68), and having considered the three stay-related factors, hereby ORDERS that the Motion is GRANTED for the reasons that follow: (1) For the reasons set out by the parties, the only scenario in which a continued stay of this case would possibly result in any further simplification is if the Federal Circuit overturns the PTAB's decision that all of the claims asserted in Civil Action Nos. 21-1570-MN-CJB and 23-1012-MN-CJB (the "other cases") are unpatentable. (Id.) That outcome is statistically very unlikely to occur, sufficiently so that it is difficult to say (factoring in all possible future eventualities) that a further stay would likely simplify the matters at issue in this case (a case that involves a different patent than that at issue in the other actions) at all. See IOENGINE LLC v. PayPal Holdings, Inc., Civil Action No. 18-452-WCB, Civil Action No. 18-826-WCB, 2020 WL 6270776, at *3, *5 (D. Del. Oct. 26, 2020); see also B.E. Tech. L.L.C. v. Twitter, Inc., C.A. No. 20-621-GBW, C.A. No. 20-622-GBW, 2023 WL 3478567, at *2 & n.2 (D. Del. May 16, 2023). In light of that (and recognizing that Plaintiff filed this case back in 2021 and understandably has an interest in moving the case towards resolution), the stay factors now favor pressing forward.; (2) In the statistically unlikely event that Plaintiff wins on appeal as to any asserted claims in the other cases (and those claims thus come back to this Court), and if thereafter Defendant can show that it will have to pay redundant costs that it could have avoided were the stay to have been continued here (i.e., if a witness who would only had to have been deposed once on one day were the stay to have been continued, now has to travel to a deposition a second time), (D.I. 167 at 1), then Defendant could ask the Court to award it such costs thereafter. But we can cross that bridge if we ever come to it.; and (3) As for Defendant's arguments about how a schedule in this case should look, (id. at 2), the Court will issue a separate order regarding the setting of such a schedule, and the parties can address those types of issues (after meeting and conferring) via that scheduling process. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/23/2024. (smg) (Entered: 09/23/2024)
2024-09-23
1
ORAL ORDER: In light of the Court's decision today, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that (after meeting and conferring) within twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order, the parties shall jointly file a proposed new Scheduling Order, which is consistent with Judge Burke's "Rule 16 Scheduling Order Patent" up through and including paragraph number 16 (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule leading up to but not including the case dispositive motion stage of the case) and that is consistent with paragraphs 15-22 of Judge Noreika's "Patent Scheduling Order - Non-ANDA" (i.e., regarding the portions of the case schedule from the case dispositive motion stage through post-trial motions). If the parties have disputes regarding portions of the proposed Scheduling Order, they may note them in the Order and briefly address their respective positions in an accompanying cover letter. Thereafter, the Court may schedule a Case Management Conference/Rule 16 Scheduling Conference to be held with Judge Burke. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 9/23/2024. (smg) (Entered: 09/23/2024)
2024-09-23
1
Order Lifting Stay
2024-09-23
1
No Actions
Oral Order
2024-09-23
1
No Actions
Joint Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Scheduling Order. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Moore, David) (Entered: 10/15/2024)
2024-10-15
1
SCHEDULING ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties’ October 15, 2024 joint letter, (D.I. 172 ), hereby adopts the parties’ proposal to refile Defendant’s motion to dismiss, (D.I. 110 ), and the parties’ joint claim construction brief, (D.I. 101, D.I. 102 ). (D.I. 172 at 1) The parties shall file the relevant motions and briefing by no later than November 5, 2024. With respect to disputes about setting a schedule, the Court, as it indicated in its prior order, (D.I. 170 ), intends to set a schedule in light of the time this case has already been pending and the work that has already been done on certain issues in the case. With regard to the parties’ disputes about the proposed schedule, (D.I. 172, ex. A), the Court: (a) adopts Defendant’s proposal regarding the location of depositions, (id., ex. A at ¶ 7(e)(ii)), and (b) will tentatively schedule a five-day (5) jury trial, (id., ex. A at ¶ 22). Dispositive motions to be filed on September 9, 2025. A pretrial conference is set for January 5, 2026 at 4:30 p.m. in Courtroom 4A before Judge Maryellen Noreika. A 5-day Jury Trial is set for January 12, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 4A before Judge Maryellen Noreika. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 10/29/2024. (smg) (Entered: 10/29/2024)
2024-10-29
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Second Set of Requests for Admission (No. 8), and Plaintiff's Third Supplemental Disclosures Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(A) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 10/30/2024)
2024-10-30
1
JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEF (Revised) filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Jones, Keith) (Entered: 11/04/2024)
2024-11-04
1
MOTION for Claim Construction re 71 Claim Construction Chart, 175 Joint Claim Construction Brief - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 11/04/2024)
2024-11-04
1
MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings [Renewed] - filed by Apple, Inc.. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 11/05/2024)
2024-11-05
1
MOTION for Claim Construction [Renewed] re 71 Claim Construction Chart, 175 Joint Claim Construction Brief - filed by Apple, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 11/05/2024)
2024-11-05
1
REQUEST for Oral Argument by ImmerVision, Inc. re 177 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings [Renewed]. (Jones, Keith) (Entered: 11/06/2024)
2024-11-06
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Third Amended Initial Disclosures filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 11/13/2024)
2024-11-13
1
NOTICE requesting Clerk to remove Kenneth A. Kuwayti and Karina N. Pundeff as co-counsel. Reason for request: No Longer Working on Matter. (Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 11/14/2024)
2024-11-14
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Production of Documents marked IMV0043412 to IMV0043427 filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 11/14/2024)
2024-11-14
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc.'s Fourth Set of Interrogatories (No. 9-11) and Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc.'s Second Requests for Admission (No. 8) [CONFIDENTIAL] filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 12/02/2024)
2024-12-02
1
MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Xaviere N. Giroud of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP - filed by Apple, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 12/02/2024)
2024-12-02
1
Pro Hac Vice Fee - Credit Card Payment received for Xaviere N. Giroud. ( re 184 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Xaviere N. Giroud of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP )( Payment of $ 50, receipt number ADEDC-4560418).(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 12/02/2024)
2024-12-02
1
-District Court Pro Hac Vice Fee - 01 Attorney Credit Card Payment
2024-12-02
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED
2024-12-04
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED, D.I. 184 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Xaviere N. Giroud of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 12/4/2024. (smg)
2024-12-04
1
No Actions
Pro Hac Vice Attorney Xaviere N. Giroud for Apple, Inc. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (scs)
2024-12-05
1
No Actions
Add Attorneys - PHV only
2024-12-05
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Final Infringement Contentions filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 12/09/2024)
2024-12-09
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Final Invalidity Contentions and Exhibits A1, A3-A7 to Defendant Apple Inc.'s Final Invalidity Contentions filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 01/14/2025)
2025-01-14
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Fourth Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. (Nos. 13-17), Defendant Apple Inc.'s Third Set of Requests for Production to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. (Nos. 75-78), and Defendant Apple Inc.'s First Set of Requests for Admission to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. (Nos. 1-18) filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 01/16/2025)
2025-01-16
1
MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Philip L. Hirschhorn - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 01/22/2025)
2025-01-22
1
Pro Hac Vice Fee - Credit Card Payment received for Philip L. Hirschhorn. ( re 189 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Philip L. Hirschhorn )( Payment of $ 50, receipt number ADEDC-4596119).(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 01/22/2025)
2025-01-22
1
SO ORDERED
2025-01-22
1
No Actions
-District Court Pro Hac Vice Fee - 01 Attorney Credit Card Payment
2025-01-22
1
No Actions
Add Attorneys - PHV only
2025-01-22
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED, D.I. 189 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Philip L. Hirschhorn filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 01/22/2025. (smg)
2025-01-22
1
No Actions
Pro Hac Vice Attorney Philip L. Hirschhorn for ImmerVision, Inc. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (cdd)
2025-01-22
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Fifth Set of Interrogatories to Defendant filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 01/23/2025)
2025-01-23
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Fourth Set of Requests for Production to Defendant, and (2) Plaintiff's Notice of Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Apple Inc. filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 01/28/2025)
2025-01-28
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Francesca Sweet on March 11, 2025, at noon ET filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/13/2025)
2025-02-13
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Alex Felli on March 13, 2025, at noon ET filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/13/2025)
2025-02-13
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Catherine Spevak on March 20, 2025, at noon ET filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/13/2025)
2025-02-13
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Brian Ankenbrandt on March 21, 2025, at noon ET filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/13/2025)
2025-02-13
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Defendant's Third Set of Requests for Production, (2) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Defendant's Fourth Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 13-17), and (3) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Defendant's First Set of Requests for Admissions (Nos. 1-18) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/13/2025)
2025-02-13
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Notice of Deposition of Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(B)(6) filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 02/17/2025)
2025-02-17
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc.'s 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice of Apple Inc. filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 02/18/2025)
2025-02-18
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Francesca Sweet on March 25, 2025, at noon ET filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/21/2025)
2025-02-21
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Brian Ankenbrandt on March 28, 2025, at noon ET filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/21/2025)
2025-02-21
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Fifth Set of Requests for Production to Defendant, and (2) Plaintiff's Sixth Set of Interrogatories to Defendant filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/21/2025)
2025-02-21
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc.'s Fifth Set of Interrogatories (No. 12) filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 02/24/2025)
2025-02-24
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Second Amended Responses and Objections to Defendant Apple Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-9) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/25/2025)
2025-02-25
1
MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Caleb A. Kennedy of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP - filed by Apple, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Moore, David) (Entered: 02/25/2025)
2025-02-25
1
Pro Hac Vice Fee - Credit Card Payment received for Caleb A. Kennedy. ( re 205 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Caleb A. Kennedy of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP )( Payment of $ 50, receipt number ADEDC-4622606).(Moore, David) (Entered: 02/25/2025)
2025-02-25
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Fifth Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. (Nos. 18-24), Defendant Apple Inc.'s Fourth Set of Requests for Production to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. (Nos. 79-80), and Defendant Apple Inc.'s Second Set of Requests for Admission to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc. (Nos. 19-50) filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 02/25/2025)
2025-02-25
1
-District Court Pro Hac Vice Fee - 01 Attorney Credit Card Payment
2025-02-25
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Defendant Apple Inc.'s Notice of Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of ImmerVision, Inc. filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 02/26/2025)
2025-02-26
1
SO ORDERED, D.I. 205 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Caleb A. Kennedy of Goldman Ismail Tomaselli Brennan & Baum LLP filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 02/26/2025. (sam)
2025-02-26
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED
2025-02-26
1
No Actions
NOTICE requesting Clerk to remove Jennifer M. Hartjes as co-counsel. Reason for request: No Longer with Firm. (Moore, David) (Entered: 02/27/2025)
2025-02-27
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc.'s Fourth Set of Requests for Production (Nos. 49-51) filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 02/27/2025)
2025-02-27
1
Pro Hac Vice Attorney Caleb A. Kennedy for Apple, Inc. added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (cdd)
2025-02-27
1
No Actions
Add Attorneys - PHV only
2025-02-27
1
No Actions
STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Take Certain Fact Witnesses Depositions Out of Time re 173 Scheduling Order,,,,, by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 03/05/2025)
2025-03-05
1
SO ORDERED, D.I. 211 Stipulation and Order to Take Certain Fact Witnesses Depositions Out of Time re 173 Scheduling Order filed by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 03/05/2025. (sam)
2025-03-05
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED
2025-03-05
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff's Fourth Supplemental Disclosures Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(A) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 03/14/2025)
2025-03-14
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Jocelyn Parent on March 31, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. [Notice of Rule 30(b)(1) Deposition] filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 03/17/2025)
2025-03-17
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Patrice Roulet on March 26, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. [Notice of Rule 30(b)(1) Deposition] filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 03/17/2025)
2025-03-17
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Pascale Nini on March 20, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. [Notice of Rule 30(b)(1) Deposition] filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 03/17/2025)
2025-03-17
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc.'s Sixth Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 13-14) and Defendant Apple Inc.'s Responses and Objections to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc.'s Fifth Set of Requests for Production (Nos. 52-54) filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 03/24/2025)
2025-03-24
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Request for Discovery Dispute Teleconference. (Moore, David) (Entered: 03/24/2025)
2025-03-24
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties March 24, 2025 joint letter, (D.I. 217 ), hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) By March 31, 2025, Defendant shall file a Motion To Resolve Discovery Dispute.; (2) By March 31, 2025 Defendant shall file with the Court a letter, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the issue in dispute and its position on that issue.; (3) By April 4, 2025, Plaintiff may file a letter, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the reasons for its opposition.; (4) By April 9, 2025, Defendant shall file with the Court a reply letter brief, not to exceed one (1) single-spaced page, in no less than 12-point font.; (5) The parties should also consult and follow Judge Burke's "Guidelines for Discovery Disputes," which is found in the "Guidelines" tab on Judge Burke's portion of the District Court's website.; and (6) The Court will plan to resolve the dispute on the papers, unless: (a) it determines after reviewing the briefing that oral argument is needed; or (b) any party advises the Court in advance that, were argument to be set, a newer attorney will argue the dispute(s), see Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys, https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/StandingOrder2017.pdf. If either of those circumstances occurs, then the Court will schedule oral argument on the dispute(s) in the future. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 03/25/2025. (sam) (Entered: 03/25/2025)
2025-03-25
1
Oral Order
2025-03-25
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Supplemental Responses and Objections to Plaintiff Immervision, Inc.'s First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-5) (Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only) filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 03/27/2025)
2025-03-27
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Apple Inc.'s Second Set of Requests for Admissions (Nos. 19-50), (2) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Apple Inc.'s Fourth Set of Requests for Production (Nos. 79-80), and (3) Plaintiff's Responses and Objections to Apple Inc.'s Fifth Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 18-24) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 03/27/2025)
2025-03-27
1
MOTION to Resolve Discovery Dispute re 218 Oral Order - filed by Apple, Inc. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Moore, David) Modified on 3/31/2025 (sam). (Entered: 03/31/2025)
2025-03-31
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Discovery Dispute Letter Brief - re 221 MOTION to Resolve Discovery Dispute re 218 Oral Order. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E - Proposed Order)(Moore, David) Modified on 4/1/2025 (sam). (Entered: 03/31/2025)
2025-03-31
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Keith A. Jones regarding a Request to Schedule a Teleconference to Resolve a Discovery Dispute. (Jones, Keith) Modified on 4/1/2025 (sam). Modified on 4/7/2025 (sam). (Entered: 04/01/2025)
2025-04-01
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties April 1, 2025 joint letter, (D.I. 223 ), hereby ORDERS as follows: (1) By April 7, 2025, Plaintiff shall file a Motion To Resolve Discovery Dispute.; (2) By April 7, 2025 Plaintiff shall file with the Court a letter, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the issue in dispute and its position on that issue.; (3) By April 11, 2025, Defendant may file a letter, not to exceed two (2) single-spaced pages, in no less than 12-point font, outlining the reasons for its opposition.; (4) By April 16, 2025, Plaintiff shall file with the Court a reply letter brief, not to exceed one (1) single-spaced page, in no less than 12-point font.; (5) The parties should also consult and follow Judge Burke's "Guidelines for Discovery Disputes," which is found in the "Guidelines" tab on Judge Burke's portion of the District Court's website.; and (6) The Court will plan to resolve the dispute on the papers, unless: (a) it determines after reviewing the briefing that oral argument is needed; or (b) any party advises the Court in advance that, were argument to be set, a newer attorney will argue the dispute(s), see Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys, https://www.ded.uscourts.gov/sites/ded/files/StandingOrder2017.pdf. If either of those circumstances occurs, then the Court will schedule oral argument on the dispute(s) in the future. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 04/01/2025. (sam) (Entered: 04/01/2025)
2025-04-01
1
Oral Order
2025-04-01
1
No Actions
STIPULATION to Amend the Scheduling Order [Regarding Expert Deadlines] re 173 Scheduling Order by Apple, Inc. (Palapura, Bindu) Modified on 4/4/2025 (sam). (Entered: 04/03/2025)
2025-04-03
1
Motions Referred
2025-04-03
1
No Actions
MOTION REFERRED: 177 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings [Renewed]. Motion referred to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke.(dlw)
2025-04-03
1
No Actions
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Keith A. Jones - letter reply brief re D.I. 221 Discovery Dispute per D.I. 218 Oral Order . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Jones, Keith) Modified on 4/7/2025 (sam). (Entered: 04/04/2025)
2025-04-04
1
MOTION to Resolve Discovery Dispute re 224 Oral Order - filed by ImmerVision, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Jones, Keith) Modified on 4/10/2025 (sam). (Entered: 04/07/2025)
2025-04-07
1
[SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Keith A. Jones regarding Discovery Dispute - re 224 Oral Order. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C)(Jones, Keith) Modified on 4/22/2025 (sam). (Entered: 04/07/2025)
2025-04-07
1
SO ORDERED AND ~Util - Set Deadlines
2025-04-07
1
No Actions
- CORRECTING ENTRY
2025-04-07
1
No Actions
CORRECTING ENTRY: Docket text of D.I. 224 has been modified to reflect filing as a reply letter brief related to D.I. 218 - Oral Order on Discovery Dispute. (sam)
2025-04-07
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED, D.I. 225 Stipulation to Amend the Scheduling Order [Regarding Expert Deadlines] re 173 Scheduling Order by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 04/07/2025. (sam)
2025-04-07
1
No Actions
REDACTED VERSION of 228 Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Keith A. Jones regarding discovery dispute by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C)(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 04/09/2025)
2025-04-09
1
[SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Reply in Support of Discovery Dispute - re 222 Letter,. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit F)(Moore, David) (Entered: 04/09/2025)
2025-04-09
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Production of Documents marked IMV0043428 - IMV0043551 filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 04/10/2025)
2025-04-10
1
[SEALED] Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Discovery Dispute Opposition Letter Brief - re 224 Oral Order. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Moore, David) Modified on 4/14/2025 (sam). (Entered: 04/11/2025)
2025-04-11
1
REDACTED VERSION of 230 Letter by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit F)(Moore, David) (Entered: 04/15/2025)
2025-04-15
1
REDACTED VERSION of 232 Letter by Apple, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Moore, David) (Entered: 04/15/2025)
2025-04-15
1
Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from Keith A. Jones regarding Plaintiff's Reply - re 228 Letter, 227 MOTION to Resolve Discovery Dispute re 224 Oral Order . (Jones, Keith) Modified on 4/16/2025 (sam). (Entered: 04/16/2025)
2025-04-16
1
STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Extend Certain Pre-Trial Deadlines by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 04/18/2025)
2025-04-18
1
1 - Terminate Deadlines AND SO ORDERED AND ~Util - Set Deadlines/Hearings
2025-04-21
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED, D.I. 236 Stipulation and Order to Extend Certain Pre-Trial Deadlines filed by Apple, Inc. (Opening Expert Reports due by 5/22/2025, Rebuttal Expert Reports due by 6/18/2025, Reply Expert Reports due by 7/9/2025, Expert Discovery due by 7/25/2025, Dispositive Motions due by 8/5/2025. See Stipulation for further deadlines.) Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 04/21/2025. (sam)
2025-04-21
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Amended Responses and Objections to Defendant Apple Inc.'s Fifth Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 18-24) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 05/12/2025)
2025-05-12
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Opening Expert Reports filed by Apple, Inc..(Palapura, Bindu) (Entered: 05/23/2025)
2025-05-23
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Opening Expert Report of Daniel J. Reiley, Ph.D. Regarding Infringement with Attachments, (2) Opening Expert Report of Michael Lebby, Ph.D. Regarding Infringement with Attachments, and (3) Opening Expert Report of Philip Green, CPA, CMA, ASA Regarding Damages with Attachments filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 05/27/2025)
2025-05-27
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Production of Documents marked IMV0043552 - IMV0044214 filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 06/04/2025)
2025-06-04
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Production of Documents marked IMV0044215 - IMV0044269 filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 06/09/2025)
2025-06-09
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) Plaintiff ImmerVision, Inc.'s Production of Documents marked IMV0044270-IMV0044765, (2) the Rebuttal Expert Report of Michael Lebby, (3) the Rebuttal Expert Report of Daniel J. Reiley, and (4) the Expert Disclosure Report of Jocelyn Parent filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 06/18/2025)
2025-06-18
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (i) Rebuttal Expert Report and Disclosure of Melissa A. Bennis (Highly Confidential Attorneys' Eyes Only), (ii) Rebuttal Expert Report of Jack Feinberg Regarding Non-Infringement (Contains Highly Confidential Information Subject to Protective Order), and (iii) Rebuttal Expert Report of Dr. Jose Sasian Regarding Non-Infringement filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 06/23/2025)
2025-06-23
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of (1) the Reply Expert Report of Daniel J. Reiley, (2) the Reply Expert Report of Michael Lebby, and (3) the Reply Expert Report regarding Damages of Philip Green filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 07/10/2025)
2025-07-10
1
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Notice of Rule 30(b)(1) Deposition of Daniel J. Reiley, Ph.D. and Defendant Apple Inc.'s Notice of Rule 30(b)(1) Deposition of Michael Lebby, Ph.D. filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 07/10/2025)
2025-07-10
1
STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Permit Expert Depositions Out-of-Time by Apple, Inc.. (Moore, David) (Entered: 07/11/2025)
2025-07-11
1
SO ORDERED, D.I. 246 Stipulation and Order to Permit Expert Depositions Out-of-Time by Apple, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 07/11/2025. (sam)
2025-07-11
1
No Actions
SO ORDERED
2025-07-11
1
No Actions
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Melissa A. Bennis on July 16, 2025, at 9:30 a.m. (CDT) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 07/14/2025)
2025-07-14
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Dr. Jose Sasian on July 25, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. (EDT) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 07/14/2025)
2025-07-14
1
NOTICE to Take Deposition of Jack Feinberg on July 23, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. (EDT) filed by ImmerVision, Inc..(Jones, Keith) (Entered: 07/14/2025)
2025-07-14
1
Joint Letter to The Honorable Christopher J. Burke from David E. Moore regarding Defendant's Motion to Resolve Discovery Dispute and Pendency of Certain Outstanding Motions - re 221 MOTION to Resolve Discovery Dispute re 218 Oral Order,,,,,, . (Moore, David) (Entered: 07/15/2025)
2025-07-15
1
ORAL ORDER: The Court, having reviewed the parties July 15, 2025 joint letter, (D.I. 250 ), hereby ORDERS that Defendant's Motion to Resolve Discovery Dispute, (D.I. 221 ), is DENIED as MOOT. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 07/16/2025. (sam) (Entered: 07/16/2025)
2025-07-16
1
Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief
2025-07-16
1
No Actions
NOTICE OF SERVICE of Defendant Apple Inc.'s Notice of Rule 30(b)(1) Deposition of Philip Green, CPA, CMA, ASA, and Defendant Apple Inc.'s Notice of Rule 30(b)(1) Deposition of Jocelyn Parent, Ph.D. filed by Apple, Inc..(Moore, David) (Entered: 07/17/2025)
2025-07-17
1
MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Ikenna C. Ejimonyeugwo - filed by ImmerVision, Inc.. Motions referred to Christopher J. Burke.(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/23/2025)
2025-07-23
1
Pro Hac Vice Fee - Credit Card Payment received for Ikenna C. Ejimonyeugwo. ( re 253 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Ikenna C. Ejimonyeugwo )( Payment of $ 50, receipt number ADEDC-4741012).(Simmons, John) (Entered: 07/23/2025)
2025-07-23
1
SO ORDERED, D.I. 253 Motion for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Ikenna C. Ejimonyeugwo - filed by ImmerVision, Inc. Ordered by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 07/23/2025. (sam)
2025-07-23
1
No Actions
Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice
2025-07-23
1
No Actions
-District Court Pro Hac Vice Fee - 01 Attorney Credit Card Payment
2025-07-23
1
No Actions
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re D.I. 176 MOTION for Claim Construction filed by ImmerVision, Inc., D.I. 177 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings [Renewed] filed by Apple, Inc., and D.I. 178 MOTION for Claim Construction [Rene wed] filed by Apple, Inc. Please note that when filing Objections pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2), briefing consists solely of the Objections (no longer than ten (10) pages) and the Response to the Objections (no longer than ten (10) pages). No further briefing shall be permitted with respect to objections without leave of the Court. Objections to R&R due by 8/7/2025. Signed by Judge Christopher J. Burke on 07/24/2025. (sam)
2025-07-24
1
STIPULATION and [Proposed] Order to Stay Deadlines and Vacate Scheduling Orders by ImmerVision, Inc.. (Jones, Keith) (Entered: 07/25/2025)
2025-07-25
1
1 - Terminate Deadlines and Hearings AND 1 - Terminate Scheduling Order Deadlines AND SO ORDERED
2025-08-01
1
Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief
2025-08-01
1
No Actions
Objection to Report and Recommendations
2025-08-07
1
Exhibit to a Document
2025-08-07
1
Request for Oral Argument
2025-08-08
1
Redacted Document
2025-08-14
1
- CORRECTING ENTRY
2025-08-14
1
No Actions
Response to Objections
2025-08-21
1
Order Setting Hearing on Motion
2025-09-10
1
No Actions
Motion Hearing
2025-09-18
1
No Actions
- Transcript
2025-09-21
1
Add Attorneys - PHV only
2025-11-10
1
No Actions
Notice - Other
2026-01-16
1
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 2/11/2026. (dlw)
2026-02-11
1
Order
2026-02-11
1
Judgment
2026-02-11
1
Patent/Trademark Report to Commissioner of Patents
2026-02-12
1
- NOTICE OF APPEAL - Federal Circuit
2026-02-18
1
USCA Appeal Record Sent to Reporter Hawkins
2026-02-18
1
No Actions
USCA Appeal Record Sent to Reporter Warner
2026-02-18
1
No Actions
- APPEAL - Credit Card Payment (Attorneys Only)
2026-02-18
1
No Actions
USCA Notice of Appeal and Docket Transmitted
2026-02-18
1
No Actions
- Transcript
2026-02-20
1
USCA Notice of Docketing ROA - Federal Circuit
2026-02-24
1
Notice re Attorney Appearance - Requesting Removal of Co-Counsel
2026-08-05
1
Case No Longer Referred
2026-10-05
1
No Actions