Legal Opinion
Xerox Corp. v. Google, Inc.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided September 8, 2010No. 10-136-JJF-MPTPublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ORDER
MARY PAT THYNGE, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. BACKGROUND
The parties in this patent ease dispute whether the court’s permanent protective order should include a provision preventing any of plaintiffs trial counsel with exposure to defendants’ confidential information from participating in amendment of plaintiffs patents on reexamination. Following a teleconference on this issue, the court requested and received additional submissions from the parties.1 Having considered these submissions and the relevant law, the court concludes that plaintiff should not be denied the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Seattle Times Co. v. RhinehartSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Brown Bag Software v. Symantec Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Truswal Systems Corp. v. Hydro-Air Engineering, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- U.S. Steel Corporation v. The United States and U.S. International Trade Commission, and Cosipa, IntervenorsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- In Re Jerre M. FreemanCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Philips v. Iguzzini Lighting USA, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 2015
- Front Row Technologies, LLC v. NBA Media Ventures, LLCDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2015
- EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. AT & T Mobility LLCDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2012
- Nexedge, LLC v. Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.District Court, D. Arizona · 2011
- Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Amerlux, LLCDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2016
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.