John Leo Wagner

Pennsylvania

General

Please sign up or log in to access the advanced features of
Ex Parte Professional.

Cases5

Challenger50%

Patent Owner50%

NPE50%

--

--

Practice Areas

Semicond., OpticTransport., E-Comm.Mech Eng, Manuf

Top Attorneys

Patrick J. CoyneNeal S. CohenPeter Kinsella

Elite Ratings

DCTPTABCAFC

Ratings

Please sign up or log in to access the advanced features of
Ex Parte Professional.

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

L5

A

PTAB

L5

A

CAFC

L5

A

Analytics

Lawyers

Cases

Ratings Trends

Practice Areas

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
01/05/23	Lambeth Magnetic Structures LLC v. Seagate Technology US Holdings Inc 2:16-CV-00538 ( W.D. PA )	USCA Case Number 2023-1335 for 532 Notice of Appeal, filed by LAMBETH MAGNETIC STRUCTURES, LLC. USCA for the Federal Circuit Deputy Clerk M. Ames (DOCUMENT IS RESTRICTED AND CAN ONLY BE VIEWED BY COURT STAFF) (ctb) (Entered: 01/05/2023)
10/19/22	Sonicblue Aerospace Inc v. Rolls Royce Holdings 3:21-CV-00122 ( W.D. PA )	ORDER re 68 Joint Stipulation Regarding Settlement and Dismissal With Prejudice filed by ROLLS-ROYCE HOLDINGS PLC, ROLLS-ROYCE CORPORATION, ROLLS-ROYCE NORTH AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. - Defendants Rolls-Royce North American Technologies, Inc., Rolls-Royce Corporation and Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (together, "Rolls-Royce") and Plaintiff Sonic Blue Aerospace, Inc. ("SonicBlue"), hereby respectfully stipulate for the record as follows: 1) On 6/24/20222, the Court entered an order dismissing all claims against Rolls-Royce for lack of personal jurisdiction. See ECF No. 52 . 2) On 7/8/2022, Rolls-Royce moved for fees related to this action. 3) On 10/6/2022, SonicBlue and Rolls-Royce entered into a Settlement Agreement resolving all claims that are the subject of this action, including the Rolls-Royce motion for fees in the above-captioned action. 4) Accordingly, all parties to this action hereby stipulate for the dismissal of this action with prejudice, and, to the extent that the Rolls-Royce motion for fees is not mooted hereby, Rolls-Royce hereby withdraws said motion. 5) Each party to bear its own fees and costs. IT IS SO ORDERED, Signed by Judge Stephanie L. Haines on 10/19/2022. (dlg) (Entered: 10/19/2022) ORDER re 68 Joint Stipulation Regarding Settlement and Dismissal With Prejudice filed by ROLLS-ROYCE HOLDINGS PLC, ROLLS-ROYCE CORPORATION, ROLLS-ROYCE NORTH AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC. - Defendants Rolls-Royce North American Technologies, Inc., Rolls-Royce Corporation and Rolls-Royce Holdings PLC (together, "Rolls-Royce") and Plaintiff Sonic Blue Aerospace, Inc. ("SonicBlue"), hereby respectfully stipulate for the record as follows: 1) On 6/24/20222, the Court entered an order dismissing all claims against Rolls-Royce for lack of personal jurisdiction. See ECF No. 52 . 2) On 7/8/2022, Rolls-Royce moved for fees related to this action. 3) On 10/6/2022, SonicBlue and Rolls-Royce entered into a Settlement Agreement resolving all claims that are the subject of this action, including the Rolls-Royce motion for fees in the above-captioned action. 4) Accordingly, all parties to this action hereby stipulate for the dismissal of this action with prejudice, and, to the extent that the Rolls-Royce motion for fees is not mooted hereby, Rolls-Royce hereby withdraws said motion. 5) Each party to bear its own fees and costs. IT IS SO ORDERED, Signed by Judge Stephanie L. Haines on 10/19/2022. (dlg) (Entered: 10/19/2022)
10/19/22	Sonicblue Aerospace Inc v. Rolls Royce Holdings 3:21-CV-00122 ( W.D. PA )	STIPULATION REGARDING SETTLEMENT AND DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE by ROLLS-ROYCE CORPORATION, ROLLS-ROYCE HOLDINGS PLC, ROLLS-ROYCE NORTH AMERICAN TECHNOLOGIES, INC.. (Crowson, Celine) (Entered: 10/19/2022)
08/04/19	Amgen Inc v. Mylan Inc 2:17-CV-01235 ( W.D. PA )	ORDER Directing Physical Meet and Confer and Submission of Joint Status Report. The Court has considered the filings of the parties at 276 , 277 . The Court can advise that counsel have successfully convinced the Court of their mutual capacity to litigate in this Court will unnecessary finger pointing and complexity, and at times, passing compliance with the letter of this Courts Orders, and their willingness to use email rather than direct human communication to accomplish that. No further proof in such regards is required, so counsel is invited to knock it off. The U.S. Court of Appeals has seemingly spoken on matters central to the vitality of further litigation in this Court, in this action, relative to the 707 Patent, but maybe not. So, here is what will actually assist the Court at this juncture. A least one lawyer of a senior level of authority for each party (resident in this District or otherwise as counsel determines) shall meet with one another in the same physical location. They may have with them physically, or via video or teleconference, any support from their own litigation team that the prefer. They shall have with them, physically or via electronic means, any and all client contacts that they believe would need to weigh in on the central issue the Court sees before it at this moment, namely given the precedential decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Amgen Inc v. Coherus Biosciences, Inc., 2018-1993 (July 29, 2019), on what basis, if any, can the claims of infringement in this action as to the 707 Patent proceed in good faith. The meet and confer directed by this Order shall occur on or before August 12, 2019, and a JOINT status report shall be filed in such regards on or before August 14, 2019. Signed by Chief Judge Mark R. Hornak on 08/04/2019. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (Hornak, Mark) (Entered: 08/04/2019) ORDER Directing Physical Meet and Confer and Submission of Joint Status Report. The Court has considered the filings of the parties at 276 , 277 . The Court can advise that counsel have successfully convinced the Court of their mutual capacity to litigate in this Court will unnecessary finger pointing and complexity, and at times, passing compliance with the letter of this Courts Orders, and their willingness to use email rather than direct human communication to accomplish that. No further proof in such regards is required, so counsel is invited to knock it off. The U.S. Court of Appeals has seemingly spoken on matters central to the vitality of further litigation in this Court, in this action, relative to the 707 Patent, but maybe not. So, here is what will actually assist the Court at this juncture. A least one lawyer of a senior level of authority for each party (resident in this District or otherwise as counsel determines) shall meet with one another in the same physical location. They may have with them physically, or via video or teleconference, any support from their own litigation team that the prefer. They shall have with them, physically or via electronic means, any and all client contacts that they believe would need to weigh in on the central issue the Court sees before it at this moment, namely given the precedential decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Amgen Inc v. Coherus Biosciences, Inc., 2018-1993 (July 29, 2019), on what basis, if any, can the claims of infringement in this action as to the 707 Patent proceed in good faith. The meet and confer directed by this Order shall occur on or before August 12, 2019, and a JOINT status report shall be filed in such regards on or before August 14, 2019. Signed by Chief Judge Mark R. Hornak on 08/04/2019. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (Hornak, Mark) (Entered: 08/04/2019)
09/26/17	Amgen Inc v. Mylan Inc 2:17-CV-01235 ( W.D. PA )	NOTICE of Appearance by John A. Schwab on behalf of MYLAN GMBH, MYLAN INC., MYLAN N.V., MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. (Schwab, John) (Entered: 09/26/2017)
09/26/17	Amgen Inc v. Mylan Inc 2:17-CV-01235 ( W.D. PA )	NOTICE of Appearance by William Pietragallo, II on behalf of MYLAN GMBH, MYLAN INC., MYLAN N.V., MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. (Pietragallo, William) (Entered: 09/26/2017)
09/26/17	Amgen Inc v. Mylan Inc 2:17-CV-01235 ( W.D. PA )	NOTICE of Appearance by Eric G. Soller on behalf of MYLAN GMBH, MYLAN INC., MYLAN N.V., MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. (Soller, Eric) (Entered: 09/26/2017)
09/26/17	Amgen Inc v. Mylan Inc 2:17-CV-01235 ( W.D. PA )	ORDER Declining Assignment of Patent Case, in accordance with Section 1(a)(1)(C) of Public Law 111-349, Pilot Program in Certain District Courts. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 9/26/17. (njt) (Entered: 09/26/2017)
01/05/18	Amgen Inc v. Mylan Inc 2:17-CV-01235 ( W.D. PA )	REDACTION Answer to Defendant Mylan GmbHs Counterclaims by AMGEN INC, AMGEN MANUFACTURING LIMITED. (Wolski, Thomas) (Entered: 01/05/2018)
01/03/18	Amgen Inc v. Mylan Inc 2:17-CV-01235 ( W.D. PA )	Proposed Initial Scheduling Order by AMGEN INC, AMGEN MANUFACTURING LIMITED. (Wolski, Thomas) (Entered: 01/03/2018)