Search for: "Samsung Electronics America Inc."
Results 101 - 120
of 249
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Oct 2010, 7:22 pm
The Respondents are Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung International Inc., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”), Shanghai Lenovo Electronic Co. [read post]
9 Apr 2010, 4:16 pm
In Order No. 48 (dated March 23, 2010), ALJ Bullock granted Spansion’s motion for an order compelling Respondents Samsung Electronics Corporation, Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung International, Inc., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) to produce certain documents and other information… [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 4:06 pm
The complaint alleges that Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Korea and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey (collectively, “Samsung”), AT&T, Inc. of Dallas, Texas, Best Buy Co., Inc. of Richfield, Minnesota, and BrandsMart USA, Inc. of Hollywood, Florida (all collectively, the “Proposed Respondents”) unlawfully import into the U.S., sell for importation,… [read post]
13 Sep 2010, 1:46 pm
According to the Notice of Investigation, the ITC has identified the following entities as respondents in this investigation: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of South Korea Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey Samsung International, Inc. of San Diego, California Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. of San Jose, California Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC of Richardson,… [read post]
5 May 2011, 8:30 am
Respondents Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung International, Inc., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC, Nokia, Inc., Nokia Corporation, Apple Inc., PNY Technologies, Inc., Transcend Information Inc., Transcend Information, Inc. [read post]
16 Apr 2010, 1:27 pm
Distributors of Electronics Assoc.; Nemours Foundation; Premier, Inc.; Premier Farnell; Resource Media; Samsung; Sprout Creation; Stokes Lawrence; and Wells Fargo. [read post]
30 May 2012, 12:21 pm
By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) alleging violation of Section 337 by Respondent Apple Inc. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 6:36 am
The complaint alleges that Robert Bosch GmbH of Germany and Bosch Security Systems, Inc. of Fairpoint, New York (collectively, “Bosch”), Samsung Techwin Co., Ltd. of Korea and Samsung Opto-Electronics America Inc. d/b/a Samsung Techwin America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey (collectively, “Samsung”), and Sony Corporation of Japan and Sony Electronics, Inc. of San… [read post]
24 Jan 2012, 3:42 pm
In the Order, ALJ Essex granted a joint motion filed by Complainant AU Optronics Corporation and AU Optronics Corporation America and Respondents Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., AT&T Mobility LLC, Best Buy Stores, L.P., BestBuy.com, LLC, Best Buy Purchasing, LLC, and Interbond Corporation of America d/b/a BrandsMart U.S.A. to terminate the investigation based on a settlement… [read post]
26 Jul 2011, 12:45 pm
According to the Notice of Investigation, the ITC has identified the following entities as the respondents in this investigation: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Korea Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey AT&T, Inc. of Dallas, Texas Best Buy Co., Inc. of Richfield, Minnesota BrandsMart USA, Inc. of Hollywood, Florida In addition, Chief ALJ Paul J. [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 11:27 am
No. 337-TA-634, where Sharp had alleged that Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 4:50 pm
Ltd. and Murata Electronics North America, Inc. [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 5:12 pm
According to the Notice of Investigation, the ITC has identified Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Korea, Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, Samsung LED Co., Ltd. of Korea, Samsung LED America, Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia, LG Electronics, Inc. of South Korea, LG Innotek Co., Ltd. of South Korea, LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New… [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 8:32 pm
Patent Nos. 5,926,636 (the ‘636 patent), 5,929,655 (the ‘655 patent), 6,208,879 (the ‘879 patent), and 6,456,841 (the ‘841 patent) (collectively, the “asserted patents”): Research In Motion Ltd. of Canada Research In Motion Corp. of Irving, Texas HTC Corporation of Taiwan HTC America, Inc. of Bellevue, Washington LG Electronics, Inc. of South Korea LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey LG… [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 6:00 am
The defendants named in the action are: AU Optronics Corporation; AU Optronics Corporation America, Inc.; Chi Mei Corporation; Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation; Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Inc.; CMO Japan Co., Ltd.; Hitachi Displays, Ltd.; Hitachi, Ltd.; Hitachi Electronic Devices (USA), Inc.; LG Display Co., Ltd.; LG Display America, Inc.; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung… [read post]
3 Feb 2010, 4:56 pm
According to the Notice of Investigation, the Commission has identified Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Korea, Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, and Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. of San Jose, California as the respondents in this investigation. [read post]
11 Aug 2010, 8:13 pm
The complaint alleges that chip manufacturers/distributors Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of South Korea, Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey, Samsung International, Inc. of San Diego, California, Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. of San Jose, California, Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC of Richardson, Texas (collectively “Samsung”), and… [read post]
13 Apr 2010, 3:59 pm
(“Samsung”) and Respondents Sharp Corporation, Sharp Electronics Corporation, and Sharp Electronics Manufacturing Company of America, Inc. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 1:28 pm
The High Court found that such services, comprising the cut and scanning of books per client’s request, amount to copyright infringement.Moving to designs, Paul Tjiam and Hidde Koenraad recaps on MARQUES Class99 the decision issued by the District Court of the Hague in the consolidated cases Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Maxperian NL BV and Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v Digital Revolution BV [ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2016:14383, para 4.74], which held that toner… [read post]
12 Jan 2012, 1:24 pm
(“Samsung”) and Respondents AU Optronics Corporation (“AUO”), Acer America Corp. and Acer Inc. [read post]
