§Why CasetextPricing

Core Wireless Licensing S.a.r.l. v. Apple, Inc.

RESPONSE to 248 Sealed Document Core Wireless's Submission Regarding Bench Trial

7 Cited authorities

  1. Ross v. Bernhard

    396 U.S. 531 (1970)   Cited 1,005 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the derivative nature of the plaintiffs' shareholder suit was not relevant to the question of whether a jury trial attached to their cause of action under the Seventh Amendment and observing that the same is true of a party's status as an intervenor

  2. Atlas Roofing Co. v. Occupational Safety Comm'n

    430 U.S. 442 (1977)   Cited 327 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a jury trial was not necessary for the adjudication of actions brought by the government to "correct unsafe working conditions" and to "impose civil penalties on any employer maintaining any unsafe working condition"

  3. Resqnet.com, Inc. v. Lansa, Inc.

    594 F.3d 860 (Fed. Cir. 2010)   Cited 303 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that evidence of royalty rates from licenses without a relationship to the claimed invention could not form the basis of a reasonable royalty calculation

  4. Tegal Corp. v. Tokyo Electron America Inc.

    257 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2001)   Cited 79 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that underlying questions of fact in the context of obviousness are reviewed for clear error

  5. Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Sys., Inc.

    CASE NO. 6:10-CV-473 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 6, 2013)   Cited 13 times   3 Legal Analyses

    CASE NO. 6:10-CV-473 08-06-2013 ERICSSON INC., ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. D-LINK SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL., Defendants. LEONARD DAVIS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court are the following motions: • Ericsson's Motion for a Compulsory Future Royalty and Pre-Judgment and Post-Judgment Interest (Docket No. 527); • Defendants' Rule 50(b) Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law in Favor of Defendants (Non-Infringement and Invalidity) and Motion for a New Trial (Docket No. 528); • Defendants'

  6. Imhaeuser v. Buerk

    101 U.S. 647 (1879)   Cited 86 times   1 Legal Analyses

    OCTOBER TERM, 1879. 1. Letters-patent for a combination of old ingredients are infringed by substituting for one of its elements a mechanical equivalent which was well known to be such when they were granted. 2. Letters-patent No. 48,048, granted June 6, 1865, to Jacob E. Buerk for an improvement in watchman's time detectors, are valid, and are infringed by letters-patent No. 117,442, granted July 25, 1871, to Anton Meyer for an improvement in watchman's time checks. Mr. Arthur v. Briesen for the

  7. Section 284 - Damages

    35 U.S.C. § 284   Cited 2,105 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Granting "interest and costs as fixed by the court"