Imax Corp. v. In-Three, Inc.
District Court, C.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS PENDING COMPLETION OF THE REEXAMINATION OF THE U.S. PATENT NO. 4,925,294
COOPER, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendant In-Three, Inc.’s Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Completion of Reexamination of U.S. Patent. No. 4,925,294 (docket no. 54), filed June 10, 2005. The Court, having read and considered the moving, opposition and reply documents submitted in connection with this motion, hereby DENIES the motion for the reasons and in the manner set forth below.
I. Background
This patent infringement action concerns a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Landis v. North American Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Ethicon, Inc. v. Donald J. Quigg, Commissioner of Patents & Trademarks and the United States Patent & Trademark OfficeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
3Cited by9 opinions
- PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC v. Apple Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2014
- Ada Solutions, Inc. v. Engineered Plastics, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2011
- At & T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY I v. TiVo, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2011
- Tomco2 Equipment Co. v. Southeastern Agri-Systems, Inc.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2008
- Akzenta Paneele + Profile GmbH v. Unilin Flooring N.C. LLCDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2006
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.