Snell & Wilmer LLP

General

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

or Log in

Cases440

Challenger50%

Patent Owner50%

NPE50%

snell-wilmer

swlaw.com

Practice Areas

Mech Eng, ManufSemicond., OpticTransport., E-Comm.

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
12/23/24	Graco Inc v. Carlisle Construction Materials LLC 1:21-CV-00245 ( D. DE )	REDACTED VERSION of [529] Letter by Carlisle Companies, Inc., Carlisle Construction Materials, LLC. (Attachments: # [1] Sowada Deposition Designations, # [2] CTX_0044, # [3] CTX_0046)(Raucci, Anthony) (Entered: 12/23/2024)
12/23/24	Graco Inc v. Carlisle Construction Materials LLC 1:21-CV-00245 ( D. DE )	REDACTED VERSION of [527] Letter, by Carlisle Companies, Inc., Carlisle Construction Materials, LLC. (Attachments: # [1] Dale Johnson Transcript, # [2] Jonathan Fredkove Transcript, # [3] Anthony Gargano Transcript, # [4] CTX_0024, # [5] CTX_0036)(Raucci, Anthony) (Entered: 12/23/2024)
12/23/24	Graco Inc v. Carlisle Construction Materials LLC 1:21-CV-00245 ( D. DE )	REDACTED VERSION of [519] Letter (JOINT) regarding Deposition Designations by Graco Inc., Graco Minnesota Inc.. (Keith, Colin) (Entered: 12/23/2024)
12/18/24	Applications In Internet Time LLC v. Salesforce Inc 3:13-CV-00628 ( D. NV )	ORDER of USCA, Ninth Circuit, as to [439] Notice of Appeal, filed by Applications in Internet Time, LLC. Salesforce, Inc. filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The petition was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition was referred to the circuit judges who are in regular active service. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition for panel rehearing is denied. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. The mandate of the court will issue December 24, 2024. USCA Case Number 24-1685. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CAH) (Entered: 12/18/2024) ORDER of USCA, Ninth Circuit, as to [439] Notice of Appeal, filed by Applications in Internet Time, LLC. Salesforce, Inc. filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The petition was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition was referred to the circuit judges who are in regular active service. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition for panel rehearing is denied. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. The mandate of the court will issue December 24, 2024. USCA Case Number 24-1685. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CAH) (Entered: 12/18/2024)
12/18/24	Applications In Internet Time LLC v. Salesforce Inc 3:13-CV-00628 ( D. NV )	ORDER of USCA, Ninth Circuit, as to [439] Notice of Appeal, filed by Applications in Internet Time, LLC. Salesforce, Inc. filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The petition was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition was referred to the circuit judges who are in regular active service. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition for panel rehearing is denied. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. The mandate of the court will issue December 24, 2024. USCA Case Number 24-1685. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CAH) (Entered: 12/18/2024) ORDER of USCA, Ninth Circuit, as to [439] Notice of Appeal, filed by Applications in Internet Time, LLC. Salesforce, Inc. filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The petition was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition was referred to the circuit judges who are in regular active service. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The petition for panel rehearing is denied. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. The mandate of the court will issue December 24, 2024. USCA Case Number 24-1685. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CAH) (Entered: 12/18/2024)
10/04/24	Cricut Inc v. Hunan Sijiu Technology Co Ltd 2:24-CV-00744 ( D. UT )	CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT under FRCP 7.1 filed by Plaintiff Cricut Inc. (Stewart, Jeremy) (Entered: 10/04/2024)
10/04/24	Cricut Inc v. Sainstore Technology Co Ltd 2:24-CV-00745 ( D. UT )	CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT under FRCP 7.1 filed by Plaintiff Cricut Inc. (Stewart, Jeremy) (Entered: 10/04/2024)
10/04/24	Cricut Inc v. Zhan 2:24-CV-00746 ( D. UT )	CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT under FRCP 7.1 filed by Plaintiff Cricut Inc. (Stewart, Jeremy) (Entered: 10/04/2024)
10/04/24	Cricut Inc v. Shanghai Sishun E Commerce Co Ltd 2:24-CV-00747 ( D. UT )	CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT under FRCP 7.1 filed by Plaintiff Cricut Inc. (Stewart, Jeremy) (Entered: 10/04/2024)
10/04/24	Cricut Inc v. Shanghai Sishun E Commerce Co Ltd 2:24-CV-00747 ( D. UT )	Report on the Filing of an action sent to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (Attachments: # [1] Supplement) (kec) (Entered: 10/04/2024)