Search for: "Nokia Corporation"
Results 41 - 60
of 437
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 Dec 2019, 10:24 pm
When arguing its close connection to the Northern District of California, Conti discussed some operations there, but those are different corporate entities. [read post]
8 May 2013, 10:20 am
Additionally, on information and belief, Nokia entered into an agreement with Microsoft Corporation that granted Microsoft a license and/or covenant not to assert any of Nokia's patents for infringement. [read post]
23 Apr 2014, 12:21 pm
This past November and December, the US Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and European Commission (“EC”) cleared Microsoft Corporation’s (“Microsoft”) acquisition of the bulk of the devices and services business of Nokia Corporation of Finland (“Nokia”) without any conditions. [read post]
6 Nov 2013, 10:42 am
This Kat was travelling last week when Mr Justice Arnold handed down the decision in HTC Corporation v Nokia ([2013] EWHC 3247 (Pat)), and has only now had a chance to read it. [read post]
10 Jul 2010, 1:43 pm
’s (“Apple”) motion to compel production of a corporate designee with knowledge relating to Complainants Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. [read post]
16 Apr 2009, 11:18 pm
It was founded in 1938.Nokia is a Finnish multinational communications corporation, headquartered in Keilaniemi, Espoo, a city neighbouring Finland's capital Helsinki, and was founded in 1865.Samsung has a total of 115,399 patents as of today in the U.S., Europe and Japan-- they're all here, in chronological sort order.Nokia has a totalof 36,780 patents in the U.S., Europe and Japan, listed here from the most recent.Samsung's most recent invention is United States… [read post]
27 May 2020, 6:18 am
Nokia Corporation v. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 6:35 am
Nokia even tried a Hail Mary pass by making a new round of licensing offers to some of Daimler's suppliers. [read post]
17 May 2011, 10:54 am
Microsoft, the Redmond, Washington-based computer and technology giant, seems primed to make a splash into another segment of the mobile market, with the rumors that it may aquire Nokia, the world's largest mobile unit manufacturer. [read post]
27 Jun 2011, 3:51 pm
(“Apple”) and the Respondents are Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 7:27 am
Nokia has a brilliant post on its corporate blog about how best to hold your Nokia phone. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 2:43 pm
’s (“Apple”) motion to compel interrogatory responses, further production of documents, additional 30(b)(6) testimony, and identification of corporate designees of Complainants Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. [read post]
30 Aug 2019, 6:41 am
Last month Nokia had already obtained an against Continental Automotive Systems, Inc. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 9:55 am
Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 64 (dated February 10, 2011) granting Respondents Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc. [read post]
3 Nov 2010, 3:46 pm
’s (“Apple”) motion to compel production of certain documents related to the ‘256 patent and additional 30(b)(6) testimony regarding the same from Complainants Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. [read post]
6 Aug 2022, 4:23 am
And there's another 8% for Vivo, which is not an OPPO affiliate, but like OPPO belongs to BBK Electronics Corporation of Guangzhou, China, and is also being sued by Nokia in Germany. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 5:40 pm
In the order, ALJ Bullock denied Respondents Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. [read post]
7 Dec 2010, 5:22 pm
In the Order, ALJ Gildea made an Initial Determination (“ID”) granting Complainants Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. [read post]
26 Jan 2021, 8:51 am
In its dispute with Apple, Nokia described Delaware as its "corporate home in the United States," which Conti's complaint mentions in what might be a pre-emptive strike against any objections by Nokia to that particular venue.I just mentioned Qualcomm, and the agreement that resulted from Nokia's Delaware action against Qualcomm could now set a ceiling for Nokia's FRAND royalty demands. [read post]
22 Aug 2008, 5:30 pm
In September 2007, a judge denied the motion to conditionally certify a class, concluding that the named plaintiffs did not prove that they were similarly situated due to the fact that Nokia, as a corporate policy, had not mandated a common pay procedure or arrangement or practice that adversely impacted the plaintiffs. [read post]
