Time Warner Inc

General

Total Cases48

Active Cases1

Patents49

CourtsE.D. Texas S.D. New York N.D. California

TypeOperating Company

Elite Ratings

PTAB

time-temperature

--

Ratings

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

L4

A

PTAB

L4

A

CAFC

L3

B

Analytics

Cases

Litigated Patents

Ratings Trends

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
04/10/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	ORDER OF DISMISSAL: The Court is in receipt of a letter filed by Plaintiff informing the Court that the parties have reached a settlement in principle [ECF No. 32]. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned action is discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to this Court's calendar if the parties are unable to memorialize their settlement in writing and as long as the application to restore the action is made by May 10, 2024. If no such application is made by that date, today's dismissal of the action is with prejudice. See Muze, Inc. v. Digital On Demand, Inc., 356 F.3d 492, 494 n.1 (2d Cir. 2004). SO ORDERED. ( Motions due by 5/10/2024.) (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 4/10/2024) (tg) (Entered: 04/10/2024) ORDER OF DISMISSAL: The Court is in receipt of a letter filed by Plaintiff informing the Court that the parties have reached a settlement in principle [ECF No. 32]. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned action is discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to this Court's calendar if the parties are unable to memorialize their settlement in writing and as long as the application to restore the action is made by May 10, 2024. If no such application is made by that date, today's dismissal of the action is with prejudice. See Muze, Inc. v. Digital On Demand, Inc., 356 F.3d 492, 494 n.1 (2d Cir. 2004). SO ORDERED. ( Motions due by 5/10/2024.) (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 4/10/2024) (tg) (Entered: 04/10/2024)
04/09/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	LETTER MOTION to Stay Case and Notice of Settlement Agreement in Principle addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Andrew G. DiNovo dated 4/9/2024. Document filed by Preservation Technologies LLC..(Dinovo, Andrew) (Entered: 04/09/2024)
04/02/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	LETTER addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Andrew G. DiNovo dated 4/2/2024 re: Second Amended Complaint. Document filed by Preservation Technologies LLC..(Dinovo, Andrew) (Entered: 04/02/2024)
03/27/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	SCHEDULING ORDER granting in part and denying in part 28 Letter Motion for Conference re: 28 LETTER MOTION for Conference (pre-motion) regarding anticipated Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss First Amended Complaint addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Steven Lieberman dated March 21, 2024. After reviewing the arguments set out in the parties' submissions, the motion for a pre-motion conference is DENIED, and Defendant is GRANTED leave to file a Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint on the schedule set forth below. On or before April 2, 2024, Plaintiff shall file a letter informing the Court whether it seeks leave to amend the First Amended Complaint in response to Defendant's March 21 pre-motion letter. The Court will not grant leave to amend later based on arguments in Defendant's March 21 pre-motion letter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff does not seek leave to amend the First Amended Complaint, the briefing schedule for Defendants' Motion to Dismiss shall be as follows: Motion due on or before April 16, 2024; Opposition due on or before April 30, 2024; and Reply due on or before May 7, 2024. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff elects to amend the First Amended Complaint, the Second Amended Complaint shall be filed on or before April 9, 2024. Defendant must respond to any amended complaint within 14 days of its filing. In the event Defendant files a new motion to dismiss, the briefing for that motion will be on the schedule set forth in Local Rule 6.1(b). Any request for an extension or adjournment shall be made by letter filed on ECF at least 72 hours before the deadline. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 3/26/2024) (rro) (Entered: 03/27/2024) SCHEDULING ORDER granting in part and denying in part 28 Letter Motion for Conference re: 28 LETTER MOTION for Conference (pre-motion) regarding anticipated Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss First Amended Complaint addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Steven Lieberman dated March 21, 2024. After reviewing the arguments set out in the parties' submissions, the motion for a pre-motion conference is DENIED, and Defendant is GRANTED leave to file a Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint on the schedule set forth below. On or before April 2, 2024, Plaintiff shall file a letter informing the Court whether it seeks leave to amend the First Amended Complaint in response to Defendant's March 21 pre-motion letter. The Court will not grant leave to amend later based on arguments in Defendant's March 21 pre-motion letter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff does not seek leave to amend the First Amended Complaint, the briefing schedule for Defendants' Motion to Dismiss shall be as follows: Motion due on or before April 16, 2024; Opposition due on or before April 30, 2024; and Reply due on or before May 7, 2024. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff elects to amend the First Amended Complaint, the Second Amended Complaint shall be filed on or before April 9, 2024. Defendant must respond to any amended complaint within 14 days of its filing. In the event Defendant files a new motion to dismiss, the briefing for that motion will be on the schedule set forth in Local Rule 6.1(b). Any request for an extension or adjournment shall be made by letter filed on ECF at least 72 hours before the deadline. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 3/26/2024) (rro) (Entered: 03/27/2024)
03/27/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	Set/Reset Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 4/9/2024. Motions due by 4/16/2024. Responses due by 4/30/2024 Replies due by 5/7/2024. (rro) (Entered: 03/27/2024)
03/26/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	LETTER RESPONSE to Motion addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Andrew G. DiNovo dated 3/26/2024 re: 28 LETTER MOTION for Conference (pre-motion) regarding anticipated Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss First Amended Complaint addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Steven Lieberman dated March 21, 2024. . Document filed by Preservation Technologies LLC..(Dinovo, Andrew) (Entered: 03/26/2024)
03/21/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	LETTER MOTION for Conference (pre-motion) regarding anticipated Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss First Amended Complaint addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Steven Lieberman dated March 21, 2024. Document filed by Time USA, LLC..(Lieberman, Steven) (Entered: 03/21/2024)
03/07/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT amending 1 Complaint against Time USA, LLC with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Preservation Technologies LLC. Related document: 1 Complaint..(Dinovo, Andrew) (Entered: 03/07/2024)
02/22/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	LETTER addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Andrew DiNovo dated 2/22/2024 re: Amended Complaint. Document filed by Preservation Technologies LLC..(Dinovo, Andrew) (Entered: 02/22/2024)
02/15/24	Preservation Technologies LLC v. Time USA LLC 1:23-CV-10611 ( S.D. NY )	ORDER granting in part and denying in part 23 Motion for Conference re: 23 LETTER MOTION for Conference (pre-motion) regarding anticipated Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Complaint addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Steven Lieberman dated February 12, 2024. On February 12, 2024, Defendant submitted a request for a pre-motion conference on itsanticipated motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs complaint [ECF No. 23]. The Plaintiff opposes therequest [ECF No. 24]. After reviewing the arguments set out in the parties' submissions, the motion for a pre-motion conference is DENIED, and Defendant is GRANTED leave to file a Motion to Dismiss on the schedule set forth below. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before February 22, 2024, Plaintiff shall file a letter informing the Court whether it seeks leave to amend the Complaint in response to Defendant's pre-motion letter. The Court will not grant leave to amend later based on arguments in Defendant's pre-motion letter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff does not seek leave to amend the Complaint, the briefing schedule for Defendants' Motion to Dismiss shall be as follows: Motion due on or before March 4, 2024; Opposition due on or before March 18, 2024; and Reply due on or before March 25, 2024. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff elects to amend the Complaint, the Amended Complaint shall be filed on or before March 7, 2024. Defendant must respond to any amended complaint within 14 days of its filing. In the event Defendant files a new motion to dismiss, the briefing for that motion will be on the schedule set forth in Local Rule 6.1(b). Any request for an extension or adjournment shall be made by letter filed on ECF at least 72 hours before the deadline. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 2/15/2024) (ks) (Entered: 02/15/2024) ORDER granting in part and denying in part 23 Motion for Conference re: 23 LETTER MOTION for Conference (pre-motion) regarding anticipated Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Complaint addressed to Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil from Steven Lieberman dated February 12, 2024. On February 12, 2024, Defendant submitted a request for a pre-motion conference on itsanticipated motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs complaint [ECF No. 23]. The Plaintiff opposes therequest [ECF No. 24]. After reviewing the arguments set out in the parties' submissions, the motion for a pre-motion conference is DENIED, and Defendant is GRANTED leave to file a Motion to Dismiss on the schedule set forth below. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that on or before February 22, 2024, Plaintiff shall file a letter informing the Court whether it seeks leave to amend the Complaint in response to Defendant's pre-motion letter. The Court will not grant leave to amend later based on arguments in Defendant's pre-motion letter. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff does not seek leave to amend the Complaint, the briefing schedule for Defendants' Motion to Dismiss shall be as follows: Motion due on or before March 4, 2024; Opposition due on or before March 18, 2024; and Reply due on or before March 25, 2024. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff elects to amend the Complaint, the Amended Complaint shall be filed on or before March 7, 2024. Defendant must respond to any amended complaint within 14 days of its filing. In the event Defendant files a new motion to dismiss, the briefing for that motion will be on the schedule set forth in Local Rule 6.1(b). Any request for an extension or adjournment shall be made by letter filed on ECF at least 72 hours before the deadline. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 2/15/2024) (ks) (Entered: 02/15/2024)