Investment Technology Group, Inc. v. Liquidnet Holdings, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This opinion resolves four motions for summary judgment involving claim one of a method patent 1 owned by Liquidnet Holdings, Inc. (“Liquidnet”). In brief, Liquidnet has alleged that certain electronic methods for integrating buy-side firms’ order management systems with electronic securities marketplaces, developed and marketed by Investment Technology Group (“ITG”) 2 and Pulse Trading, Inc. (“Pulse”), literally infringe claim one of Patent '834, and that ITG willfully infringed the Patent. ITG and Pulse allege that Patent…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Schriro v. SummerlinSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Roe v. City of WaterburyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
- Southwall Technologies, Inc. v. Cardinal Ig CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Kingsdown Medical Consultants, Ltd. And E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Hollister IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Dataquill Ltd. v. High Tech Computer Corp.District Court, S.D. California · 2011
- Veracode, Inc. v. Appthority, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
- Olaf Sööt Design, LLC v. Daktronics, Inc.District Court, S.D. Illinois · 2018
- Boston Scientific Corp. v. Nevro Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 2019
- Boston Scientific Corp. v. Nevro Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 2021
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.