Tiberi Law Office

Florida

General

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

or Log in

Cases5

Challenger50%

Patent Owner50%

NPE50%

Practice Areas

Semicond., OpticMech Eng, ManufCommunications

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.

or Log in

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

PTAB

CAFC

Analytics

Lawyers

Cases

Ratings Trends

Practice Areas

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
06/22/22	General Scientific Corp doing Business As Surgitel v. Den Mat Holdings LLC 2:21-CV-08418 ( C.D. CA )	ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION RE DISMISSAL by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: Upon Stipulation pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) 53, the case is dismissed in its entirety with prejudice, each party to bear its own attorney fees and costs. (gk) (Entered: 06/22/2022)
10/26/21	General Scientific Corp doing Business As Surgitel v. Den Mat Holdings LLC 1:21-CV-00882 ( D. DE )	Remark: Case transferred from Delaware has been opened in CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA as case 2:21-cv-08418, filed 10/25/2021. (mal) (Entered: 10/26/2021)
06/07/19	Infinity Computer Products Inc v. Epson America Inc 2:18-CV-02532 ( C.D. CA )	ORDER GRANTING Joint Stipulation to Dismiss With Prejudice 171 by Judge R. Gary Klausner that dismissal of all claims for relief asserted by Infinity against Epson and by Epson against Infinity herein are dismissed with prejudice, and each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees incurred in this action. The Court maintains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement between the parties settling this action. (jp) (Entered: 06/07/2019) ORDER GRANTING Joint Stipulation to Dismiss With Prejudice 171 by Judge R. Gary Klausner that dismissal of all claims for relief asserted by Infinity against Epson and by Epson against Infinity herein are dismissed with prejudice, and each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees incurred in this action. The Court maintains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement between the parties settling this action. (jp) (Entered: 06/07/2019)