STC.UNM v. Intel Corporation

Summary

STC.UNM is suing Intel Corporation for patent infringement in federal court. The case involves allegations that Intel has infringed one or more of STC.UNM's patents, though the specific patent numbers and technology at issue are not detailed in the available case information.

Summary generated by AI from public docket data. Verify against the original filing before relying on it.

Coverage vs reality meter

Entities in this case

Parties

STC.UNM (plaintiff) INTEL CORPORATION (defendant)

Docket entries

1. #472015-03-30

   The petition for writ of certiorari, [14-717], filed on 12/16/2014, was Denied on 03/30/2015. [228251] [JW] [Entered: 03/31/2015 11:34 AM]

2. #462014-12-18

   Petition for writ of Certiorari filed on 12/16/2014 in the Supreme Court of the United States. Supreme Court #: 14-717, STC.UNM v. Intel Corporation. [209136] [AT] [Entered: 01/13/2015 09:02 AM]

3. #452014-09-25

   Mandate issued to the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico. Service as of this date by Clerk of Court [185235] [AT] [Entered: 09/25/2014 07:54 AM]

4. #442014-09-17

   PRECEDENTIAL ORDER filed denying [39] petition for en banc rehearing filed by STC.UNM. By: En Banc (Per Curiam). DYK, Circuit Judge, with whom MOORE and TARANTO, Circuit Judges, join, concurs in the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc. NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, with whom LOURIE, O’MALLEY, and WALLACH, Circuit Judges, join, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc. O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge, with whom NEWMAN, LOURIE, and WALLACH, Circuit Judges, join, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc. Service as of this date by Clerk of Court. [183321] [AT] [Entered: 09/17/2014 11:21 AM]

5. #432014-08-07

   16 paper copies of the response [42] received from Appellee Intel Corporation. [173645] [LAJ] [Entered: 08/07/2014 03:58 PM]

6. #422014-08-06

   RESPONSE of Appellee Intel Corporation to the petition for en banc rehearing [39] filed by Appellant STC.UNM in 13-1241. Service: 08/06/2014 by email. [173311] [Steven Hirsch] [Entered: 08/06/2014 03:25 PM]

7. #412014-07-23

   The court invites a response from Appellee Intel Corporation to the petition for en banc rehearing filed by Appellant in 13-1241.. [169716] [LAJ] [Entered: 07/23/2014 12:59 PM]

8. #402014-07-07

   16 paper copies of the petition for en banc rehearing [39] received from Appellant STC.UNM. [165698] [LAJ] [Entered: 07/07/2014 03:57 PM]

9. #392014-07-03

   Petition for en banc rehearing filed by Appellant STC.UNM. Service: 07/03/2014 by email. [165296] [Rolf Stadheim] [Entered: 07/03/2014 03:05 PM]

10. #382014-06-06

    OPINION and JUDGMENT filed. The judgment or decision is: affirmed. (Precedential Opinion). (For the Court: Rader,Circuit Judge; Newman,Circuit Judge and Dyk,Circuit Judge). Newman, Circuit Judge, dissenting. [159591] [LAJ] [Entered: 06/06/2014 11:13 AM]

11. #372014-05-16

    Citation of Supplemental Authority pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 28(j) for Appellee Intel Corporation. Service: 05/16/2014 by email. [155098] [Robert Van Nest] [Entered: 05/16/2014 02:15 PM]

12. #362014-05-16

    Notice of Rejection to Appellee Intel Corporation, the following document(s) cannot be filed: [35] party letter. Reason(s) Wrong event/relief selected. Filer needs to resubmit this document under event Calendar, then choose Citation of Supplemental Authority. Service: 05/16/2014 by clerk. [CT] [Entered: 05/16/2014 09:39 AM]

13. #352014-05-15

    Letter from Appellee Intel Corporation Notice of Supplemental Authority. Service: 05/15/2014 by email. [154816] [Robert Van Nest] [Entered: 05/15/2014 03:15 PM]

14. #342013-11-08

    Submitted after ORAL ARGUMENT by Mr. George C. Summerfield, Jr. for STC.UNM and Robert A. Van Nest, Esq. for Intel Corporation. Panel: Judge: Rader, Judge: Newman, Judge: Dyk. [115774] [KSH] [Entered: 11/08/2013 10:37 AM]

15. #332013-10-15

    Response to oral argument order from the Appellant STC.UNM designating George C. Summerfield as arguing attorney. Service: 10/15/2013 by email Designated time for argument: 13 minutes. Designated time for rebuttal: 2 minutes. [110237] [George Summerfield] [Entered: 10/15/2013 04:04 PM]

16. #322013-10-11

    Response to oral argument order from the Appellee Intel Corporation designating Robert A. Van Nest as arguing attorney. Service: 10/11/2013 by email Designated time for argument: 15 minutes. Designated time for rebuttal: 0 minutes. [109803] [Robert Van Nest] [Entered: 10/11/2013 02:34 PM]

17. #312013-09-24

    NOTICE OF CALENDARING. Panel: 1311M. Case scheduled Nov 08, 2013 10:00 a.m. at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Howard T. Markey National Courts Building, 717 Madison Place, N.W. Washington, DC 20439), Courtroom 402. Please review the Oral Argument Order. [105742] [13-1241, 12-1513, 12-1297, 13-7025] [KSH] [Entered: 09/24/2013 10:22 AM]

18. #302013-08-23

    6 paper copies of the appendix Brief [29] received from Appellant STC.UNM. [99926] [VDW] [Entered: 08/23/2013 03:52 PM]

19. #292013-08-15

    APPENDIX FILED for STC.UNM and Intel Corporation [28]. Title: Joint Appendix, [Non-Confidential version only]. Number of Pages: 384. Service: 08/15/2013 by email.. Pursuant to ECF-10, filer is directed to file six copies of the brief in paper format. The paper copies of the brief should be received by the court on or before 08/26/2013. [99323] [LAJ] [Entered: 08/21/2013 12:31 PM]

20. #282013-08-15

    TENDERED from Appellant STC.UNM. Title: JOINT APPENDIX. Service: 08/15/2013 by email. [98469] [George Summerfield] [Entered: 08/15/2013 06:02 PM]

Docket history from CourtListener/RECAP — most recent first.