Legal Opinion
Cellwitch Inc. v. Tile, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided December 20, 2023No. 4:19-cv-01315Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CELLWITCH INC., Case No. 19-cv-01315-JSW Plaintiff, 8 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF 9 v. CELLWITCH, INC.’S MOTION TO ENFORCE IPR ESTOPPEL 10 TILE, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 156 Defendant. 11 12 13 Now before the Court for consideration is Plaintiff Cellwitch, Inc.’s (“Cellwitch” or 14 “Plaintiff”) motion to enforce IPR estoppel pursuant to 35 U.S.C § 315(e)(2). (Dkt. No. 156 15 (“Mot”).) Having carefully reviewed the parties’ papers, considered their arguments, and the 16 relevant legal authority, the Court DENIES Cellwitch’s…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Beckman Industries, Inc. Smithkline Beckman, and Stauffer Chemical Company, Intervenors-Appellees v. International Insurance Company, Beckman Industries, Inc. Smithkline Beckman, and Monsanto Company Reichhold Limited Fmc Corporation Bridgestone/firestone, Intervenors-Appellees v. International Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. SandsDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1995
- Ironburg Inventions Ltd. v. Valve CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2023
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.