Legal Opinion
Microsoft Corp. v. WEBXCHANGE INC.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided May 31, 2010No. C.A. 09-484-JJFPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
FARNAN, District Judge.
Presently before the Court is Defendant WebXchange Inc.’s Motion For Attorney’s Fees (D.I. 24). For the reasons discussed, WebXchange’s Motion will be denied.
I. Background
On March 5, 2008, WebXchange Inc. (“WebXchange”) instituted three patent infringement actions against Allstate Insurance Company, et al., Dell, Inc., and FedEx Corporation, et al. in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (the “Related Cases”). 1 The three patents-in-suit asserted by WebXchange in the Related Cases are the same patents-in-suit as in this action.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Shirley K. Rogers v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000
- Epcon Gas Systems, Inc. And Norman S. Loren v. Bauer Compressors, Inc., Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- In Re Prudential Insurance Company America Sales Practice Litigation Agent Actions, Michael P. Malakoff, Esquire, and Malakoff, Doyle & Finberg, P.C.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2002
- Ford v. Temple HospitalCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- American Technical Ceramics Corp. v. Presidio Components, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2020