The PACER Case Locator is a national index for the federal courts. Users may conduct nationwide searches to determine whether or not a party is involved in federal litigation.
The federal judiciary’s current fiscal year began October 1, 2010. There were 13,221 new PACER accounts created in October; 12,485 in November; 11,518 in December; and 13,908 in January.
Microsoft Slapped Google Around In Court, And It's Becoming Clear Google Overpaid For Motorola
Reuters | Apr. 26, 2013, 8:14 AM | 1,177 | 2
steve ballmer microsoft
" Associated Press
SEATTLE (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp came out on top in the first of two patent trials versus Google Inc's Motorola Mobility unit on Thursday, as a federal judge in Seattle ruled largely in its favor.
U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle said Microsoft owed only a fraction of the royalties Motorola had claimed for use of its technology in Microsoft's Xbox console.
Motorola had sought as much as $4 billion a year for use of its wireless and video patents, while Microsoft argued its rival deserved about $1 million a year. Robart decided the appropriate payment was about $1.8 million.
Microsoft welcomed the outcome.
"This decision is good for consumers because it ensures patented technology committed to standards remains affordable for everyone," said David Howard, Microsoft's Deputy General Counsel, in a statement.
A Motorola representative could not immediately be reached for comment.
The ruling is a blow for Google, which bought Motorola for $12.5 billion, partly for its intellectual property stockpile. Robart's low valuation make Motorola's patents a weaker bargaining chip for Google to negotiate licensing deals with others.
The second patent trial between the two, set for this summer in Seattle, will decide if Motorola breached its duty to license its so-called standard, essential patents to Microsoft on fair terms.
The Microsoft-Motorola spat is just one strand of a wide-ranging battle over who owns the technology behind smartphones and other new electronic devices.
Apple Inc and Microsoft have been litigating in courts around the world against Google and partners such as Samsung Electronics Co Ltd, which use the Android operating system on their hardware.
They are swapping their own shares and paying commission on ea. transaction trying to make it look like a bad pacer release just happened. A few get desperate and dump then the selling stops! How funny!
First G says we are not infringing because we are using Bowman Cullis as our system which is prior art. Then the trial comes along and they never once mention any new system possibilities in progress which would have secured some jury interest at the least. Now 5 months after they have a supposed workaround system which can only conclude they lied during the entire trial . That alone should be contempt and wasting the courts time. JJ knows what needs to be done but can he actually pull the trigger?
Based on their supposed work around they posses, if it was denied to be heard and their request for an extension thwarted would they have the right to appeal?
waiting their destiny by a judges decision. One who must know the outcome!
It's a set up for Mistrial? IMPOSSIBLE! No new theory like Google claims just more confusion added to an already screwed up case. JJ, time to get courtroom management under control NOW!
That 9 pg. reply said Judge Jackson what more can we possibly do to convince you that Google is only using the system now to delay Justice! They spelled out all history from beginning to end and gave him back his own rulings. Now we're faced with another deadline for post judgment response which was due from both parties by April 25th. It's essentially back to square one or worse if he give G the thumbs up! Then I believe we see Vringo Google mistrial!
One other point to remember, Clinton nominated him for this position. The Democrats need Google's campaign contributions for the next election which will include who, you guessed it Hillary Clinton herself! Without every dime from Google and others this doesn't work out well for DEMS.! Like I said, he has got to give clear reasons why Google should be allowed this. That's not going to be easy.
After a decision is released is the receiving timestamp on your end? Just curious. Thanks.
post judgment RR% and now your contemplating giving them a continuance to re-depose Dr. Becker. You completely lost control of your own courtroom I'd say. If you grant this who knows what you'll do next. Perhaps Google's setting this up for a new trial based on your "INDECISION" to rule appropriately!
only way shareholders win is a Vringo halt! SAD
The only way shareholders win is a Vringo halt for pending news!
Rocket Docket Diligence
By W. Steven Paleos
Reprinted from The Washington Lawyer, January/February 1998
Engraved in granite over a nearby court building entrance is the motto "Justice Delayed Justice Denied." It's not another empty promise for a just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action. In that court - the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division - the time from filing to trial for civil cases is seven months, less than half the national median of 18 months.1 The district maintains this record even while handling about 13 percent more filings per judgeship than the average district.2 The "Rocket Docket,"3 as this court has been dubbed, should serve as a national model for our judicial system.
When compared to the District of Columbia, the Eastern District of Virginia truly stands out. In the nation's capital the median time between filing and disposition at trial is 23 months.4 Yet there are 114 percent more filings per judgeship in the Eastern District of Virginia than in the District of Columbia,5 a fact that raises a serious question regarding the administration of justice in the District.
The frustrations of delayed dispositions is particularly acute for innocent, deep-pocket defendants in civil lawsuits in the District of Columbia. I know of one motion for summary judgment that was filed in November 1993 but was not ruled upon until September 30, 1997. Despite the frivolous nature of the claim against the defendant in that case, it is a contingent claim nonetheless and has had to be disclosed to regulatory bodies, on every credit application, on insurance application renewals and to the defendant's spouse, partners and employees. A four-year wait to get a resolution, which in the Alexandria Division would have taken just two weeks, makes a dead letter of Rule 1's admonition to administer the rules "to secure the just, speed, and inexpensive determination of every action," and the Rule 56 directive to r
If any further continuances are granted. The written rules according to the EDVA standard of "Rocket Docket" are not being followed. The misconduct on his behalf can be addressed if Vringo chooses. It's outside the appeals system and points directly to his decisions made in error.
Do it Vringo!
with one thing mentioned several times in the response by Vringo... to grant Google ANY extension even after a favorable verdict for us clearly denies Vringo justice. If he allows them another extension to grill Dr. Becker again He had better have a written reason and matching case to compare his ruling. It wont be long before criminals are allowed to postpone their jail sentences for a year after conviction because judges like this set the bar in ridiculous fashion. Quit leaning on your own presumption and do your job according to law. Vringo won and yet Google is allowed to continue infringing without a care in the world. I'd say empty your pockets but we all know that's not where we'll find it, will we!