Search for: "QUALCOMM INCORPORATED v. INTEL CORPORATION "
Results 1 - 8
of 8
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jan 2014, 10:46 am
Johnson of Johnson & Johnson, and Alexander Rogers of Qualcomm Incorporated. [read post]
17 Jan 2014, 4:46 am
Johnson of Johnson & Johnson, and Alexander Rogers of Qualcomm Incorporated. [read post]
24 Feb 2022, 6:12 pm
One more is still pending – Intel Corporation v. [read post]
9 Mar 2014, 7:52 am
The evidence also shows that the suppliers of the accused components are located in California—Qualcomm Incorporated is based in San Diego and Intel Corporation is based in Santa Clara. [read post]
14 Dec 2021, 9:57 am
Qualcomm Incorporated, No. 21-746, this one focusing on standing to appeal a final written decision. [read post]
29 Jan 2013, 7:21 pm
But she saw a contradiction in the jury's finding of exhaustion and non-infringement, given that exhaustion would require Intel's baseband chips to substantially embody the patented invention: if Apple used Intel chips in the accused products (Apple's more recent products come with Qualcomm chips) and if those implement the patent, then Apple's products incorporating those Intel chips, by definition, also implement it. [read post]
27 Feb 2014, 9:38 am
The evidence also shows that the suppliers of the accused components are located in California—Qualcomm Incorporated is based in San Diego and Intel Corporation is based in Santa Clara. [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]
