Annihilare Medical Systems Inc

General

Total Cases1

Active Cases--

Patents1

CourtsW.D. North Carolina

TypeOperating Company

Elite Ratings

--

--

--

--

Ratings

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

--

--

--

PTAB

--

--

--

CAFC

--

--

--

Analytics

Cases

Litigated Patents

Ratings Trends

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
03/04/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	REPORT on the Determination of an action regarding patent and/or trademark numbers contained in complaint. (clc) (Entered: 03/04/2021)
03/04/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	REPORT on the Determination of an action regarding patent and/or trademark numbers contained in complaint. (clc)
03/03/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	STIPULATION of Dismissal of All Claims, Counterclaims, and Third-Party Claims, With Prejudice by Annihilare Medical Systems, Inc., Marion E. Paris, Clay Parker Sipes (Fulton, Ross) (Entered: 03/03/2021)
03/03/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	STIPULATION of Dismissal of All Claims, Counterclaims, and Third-Party Claims, With Prejudice by Annihilare Medical Systems Inc. , Marion E. Paris, Clay Parker Sipes (Fulton, Ross)
02/10/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	Notice of Withdrawal of document by Annihilare Medical Systems, Inc., Marion E. Paris, Clay Parker Sipes ***Documents terminated: 57 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Annihilare Medical Systems, Inc., Clay Parker Sipes, Marion E. Paris. (Fulton, Ross) (Entered: 02/10/2021)
02/10/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	Notice of Withdrawal of document by Annihilare Medical Systems Inc. , Marion E. Paris, Clay Parker Sipes ***Documents terminated: [57] MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Annihilare Medical Systems Inc. , Clay Parker Sipes, Marion E. Paris. (Fulton, Ross)
02/09/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	TEXT-ONLY ORDER denying 68 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. The Court has already allowed one extension of time to respond to the relevant motions. Because one of those pending motions challenges this Court's jurisdiction over this matter, the Court finds it would be improper to administratively close a case where subject matter jurisdiction remains at issue. Moreover, while the Court encourages the parties to resolve the disputes among them, ongoing settlement discussions are an insufficient basis for a second extension of time.(FDW) (Entered: 02/09/2021) TEXT-ONLY ORDER denying 68 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. The Court has already allowed one extension of time to respond to the relevant motions. Because one of those pending motions challenges this Court's jurisdiction over this matter, the Court finds it would be improper to administratively close a case where subject matter jurisdiction remains at issue. Moreover, while the Court encourages the parties to resolve the disputes among them, ongoing settlement discussions are an insufficient basis for a second extension of time.(FDW) (Entered: 02/09/2021)
02/09/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re: 57 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim due to settlement in principle by PCT, LTD, Paradigm Convergence Technologies Corporation. Responses due by 2/23/2021 (Ferguson, Russ). Motions referred to David Keesler. (Entered: 02/09/2021)
02/09/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	TEXT-ONLY ORDER denying [68] Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. The Court has already allowed one extension of time to respond to the relevant motions. Because one of those pending motions challenges this Court's jurisdiction over this matter, the Court finds it would be improper to administratively close a case where subject matter jurisdiction remains at issue. Moreover, while the Court encourages the parties to resolve the disputes among them, ongoing settlement discussions are an insufficient basis for a second extension of time.(FDW) TEXT-ONLY ORDER denying [68] Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. The Court has already allowed one extension of time to respond to the relevant motions. Because one of those pending motions challenges this Court's jurisdiction over this matter, the Court finds it would be improper to administratively close a case where subject matter jurisdiction remains at issue. Moreover, while the Court encourages the parties to resolve the disputes among them, ongoing settlement discussions are an insufficient basis for a second extension of time.(FDW)
02/09/21	PCT Ltd v. Paris 3:20-CV-00287 ( W.D. NC )	Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re: [57] MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim due to settlement in principle by PCT, LTD, Paradigm Convergence Technologies Corporation. Responses due by 2/23/2021 (Ferguson, Russ). Motions referred to David Keesler.