Fantasia Trading LLC

General

Total Cases33

Active Cases7

Patents1

CourtsD. Delaware C.D. California E.D. Texas

TypeOperating Company

Elite Ratings

--

--

--

--

Ratings

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

--

--

--

PTAB

L4

E

CAFC

--

--

--

Analytics

Cases

Litigated Patents

Ratings Trends

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
07/16/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	ORAL ORDER: The Daubert Hearing is now rescheduled for 11/18/2024, at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 6A, and the Markman Hearing is rescheduled for 11/19/2024, at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 6A. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 7/16/2024. (nms) (Entered: 07/16/2024)
07/09/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	ORAL ORDER: At the request of counsel, due to unforeseen circumstances the Daubert hearing scheduled for 7/15/2024, and the Markman hearing scheduled for 7/16/2024, are CANCELED. The hearings will be rescheduled for dates to be determined. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 7/9/2024. (nms) (Entered: 07/09/2024)
06/13/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	Letter to The Honorable Richard G. Andrews, from John G. Day, regarding response to Plaintiff's June 5, 2024 notice of subsequent authority. (Day, John) Modified on 6/13/2024 (nms). (Entered: 06/13/2024)
06/05/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	Letter to The Honorable Richard G. Andrews, from Michael J. Farnan, regarding subsequent authority. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 6/5/2024 (nms). (Entered: 06/05/2024)
05/22/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	NOTICE of Withdrawal by Fundamental Innovation Systems International LLC re 222 MOTION for Reconsideration of the Courts Oral Order Dated April 29, 2024 (D.I. 220) (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 05/22/2024)
05/20/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	REDACTED VERSION of 222 MOTION for Reconsideration of the Courts Oral Order Dated April 29, 2024 (D.I. 220) by Fundamental Innovation Systems International LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits A-B, # 2 Rule 7.1.1 Certification, # 3 Text of Proposed Order, # 4 Certificate of Service)(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 05/20/2024)
05/17/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	MEMORANDUM ORDER: Plaintiff's Motion to Exclude Certain Testimony by Defendants' Experts (D.I. 124 ) is GRANTED. Mr. Bakewell's reasonable royalty calculations based on the RPX license is excluded (see Memorandum Order for further details). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 5/17/2024. (nms) (Entered: 05/17/2024)
05/13/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	[SEALED] MOTION for Reconsideration of the Courts Oral Order Dated April 29, 2024 (D.I. 220) - filed by Fundamental Innovation Systems International LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 7.1.1 Certification, # 4 Proposed Order, # 5 Certificate of Service)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 5/13/2024 (nms). (Entered: 05/13/2024)
05/02/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	ORAL ORDER: At Plaintiff counsel's request, and due to a scheduling conflict, the Daubert hearing scheduled for 5/20/2024, and Markman Hearing scheduled for 5/21/2024, are CANCELED. The Daubert Hearing is rescheduled for 7/15/2024, 9:00 AM in Courtroom 6A, and the Markman Hearing is rescheduled for 7/16/2024, at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6A. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 5/2/2024. (nms) (Entered: 05/02/2024) ORAL ORDER: At Plaintiff counsel's request, and due to a scheduling conflict, the Daubert hearing scheduled for 5/20/2024, and Markman Hearing scheduled for 5/21/2024, are CANCELED. The Daubert Hearing is rescheduled for 7/15/2024, 9:00 AM in Courtroom 6A, and the Markman Hearing is rescheduled for 7/16/2024, at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6A. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 5/2/2024. (nms) (Entered: 05/02/2024)
04/29/24	Fundamental Innovation Systems Intl LLC v. Anker Innovations Ltd 1:21-CV-00339 ( D. DE )	ORAL ORDER: The motion to redact (D.I. 217 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Most of the redactions are denied. The briefing is in the context of summary judgment and Daubert motions, which is fairly analogous to a trial. Thus, only something that would work a clearly defined and serious harm to a party or a third-party will be redacted. In the Courts judgment, the redactions should be limited to the company named page 49, line 18, and any subsequent times it is named; the company named on page 50, line 29, and subsequent times; the company named on page 51, line 8, and any subsequent times; the company named at page 86, line 7, and subsequent usages; the company named at page 89, line 3, and subsequent usages; the company named at page 93 line 1 and subsequent usages; and the company named at page 97, line 19. The Court notes that RPXs business model is not a secret. There is no showing that the disclosure of dollar values of the agreements and the estimated royalties, once divorced from the redacted companies, works a serious and defined harm to anyone. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 4/29/2024. (nms) (Entered: 04/29/2024) ORAL ORDER: The motion to redact (D.I. 217 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Most of the redactions are denied. The briefing is in the context of summary judgment and Daubert motions, which is fairly analogous to a trial. Thus, only something that would work a clearly defined and serious harm to a party or a third-party will be redacted. In the Courts judgment, the redactions should be limited to the company named page 49, line 18, and any subsequent times it is named; the company named on page 50, line 29, and subsequent times; the company named on page 51, line 8, and any subsequent times; the company named at page 86, line 7, and subsequent usages; the company named at page 89, line 3, and subsequent usages; the company named at page 93 line 1 and subsequent usages; and the company named at page 97, line 19. The Court notes that RPXs business model is not a secret. There is no showing that the disclosure of dollar values of the agreements and the estimated royalties, once divorced from the redacted companies, works a serious and defined harm to anyone. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 4/29/2024. (nms) (Entered: 04/29/2024)