Search results
Order by most recent / most popular / relevance
Results: 1-4 of 4
Finding of noninfringement affirmed where allegedly subversive arguments made at trial did not subvert the jury’s reason or commitment to decide the issues on the evidence received and the law as given
- Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- May 31 2010
In Verizon Services Corp. v. Cox Fibernet Virginia, Inc., Nos. 09-1086, -1098 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 16, 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s rulings on the issues of infringement and validity of Verizon Services Corp., Verizon Communications, Inc., MCI Communications, Inc., and Verizon Business Global LLC’s (collectively “Verizon”) patents
Nextel Commc’ns, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc.
- Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- September 28 2009
The TTAB sustained Nextel Communications, Inc.’s (“Nextel”) opposition to Motorola, Inc.’s (“Motorola”) application to register a “chirp” sound for cellular telephones and two-way radios
ENEA Embedded Tech., Inc. v. Eneas Corp.
- Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- April 16 2009
The District of Arizona dismissed plaintiffs’ federal infringement and unfair competition claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1
Court upholds infringement rulings against Vonage for two of three Verizon VoIP patents
- Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- October 11 2007
In Verizon Services Corp. v. Vonage Holdings Corp., Nos. 07-1240, -1251, -1274 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 26, 2007), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s claim construction, jury instructions, and injunction for two of three Verizon Services Corporation, Verizon Laboratories Inc., or Verizon Communications, Inc. (collectively “Verizon”) patents asserted against Vonage Holdings Corporation and Vonage America, Inc. (collectively “Vonage”) with respect to Voice over Internet Protocol (“VoIP”) technology
