Legal Opinion
Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG v. Xilinx Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided June 9, 2016No. Case No. 16-CV-00925-LHK, Case No. 16-CV-00926-LHKPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
Re: Dkt. No. 88 (Case No. 16-CV-00925); Dkt. No. 81 (Case No. 16-CV-00926)
LUCY H. KOH, United States District Judge
Plaintiff Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG (“Papst” or “Plaintiff’) filed patent infringement suits against Xilinx, Inc, (“Xi-linx”) and Altera Corporation (“Altera”) (collectively, “Defendants”). Plaintiff alleges that Defendants infringe claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,57⅜759 and 6,704,891. On May 11, 20Í6, Defendants filed identical Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings, contending .that the asserted claims of Papst’s patents are…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Manzarek v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Cafasso v. General Dynamics C4 Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Multimedia Plus, Inc. v. Playerlync, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- RingCentral, Inc. v. Dialpad, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2019
- Location Based Servs., LLC v. Niantic, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2017
- X One, Inc. v. Uber Technologies, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2017
- Appistry, Inc. v. Amazon.Com, Inc.District Court, W.D. Washington · 2016
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.