Enfish LLC v. Microsoft Corporation et al
Filed: November 26, 2014
State: California
Court: California Central District Court
Case Number: 2:2012cv07360
FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge Mariana R. Pfaelzer: The Court hereby ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES that: Pursuant to the Court's Order, final judgment against Plaintiff Enfish, LLC shall be entered in favor of each Defendant, Microsoft Corporation; Fise rv, Inc.; Intuit, Inc.; Sage Software, Inc.; and Jack Henry & Associates, Inc., as a prevailing party. Enfish's Complaint, as amended, and all of its asserted causes of action are dismissed with prejudice and Enfish shall recover…
Intelligent Verification Systems, LLC v. Microsoft Corporation et al
Filed: November 25, 2014
State: Virginia
Court: Virginia Eastern District Court
Case Number: 2:2012cv00525
MEMORANDUM OPINION that IVS is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees at the rate of $300 per hour for Mr. Corrie and $275 per hour for Mr. Marion, and that IVS is entitled to recover attorneys' fees for 15.75 hours for Mr. Marion's time, and for 12.3 hours for Mr. Corrie's time. IVS should be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees in the amount of $8,021.25 against Microsoft. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leonard and filed on 11/25/2014.…
Getty Images (US), Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation
Filed: November 24, 2014
State: New York
Court: New York Southern District Court
Case Number: 1:2014cv07114
OPINION AND ORDER...Microsoft's October 3 motion to dismiss Getty's Amended Complaint is denied. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 11/24/2014) (gr)
Microsoft Corporation et al v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Filed: November 20, 2014
State: New York
Court: New York Southern District Court
Case Number: 1:2014cv06039
OPINION: For the foregoing reasons, the Court denied Samsung's motion to compel arbitration and stay the case. (Signed by Judge Jed S. Rakoff on 11/20/2014) (ama)
Microsoft Corporation v. Acacia Research Corporation
Filed: November 17, 2014
State: New York
Court: New York Southern District Court
Case Number: 1:2013cv08275
OPINION & ORDER: Plaintiff Microsoft seeks an order compelling the production of Defendant Acacia's communications with third parties who sold patents to Acacia. Acacia's assertion of the common interest privilege to justify its refusal to produce the requested documents is DENIED. Acacia is directed to comply with Microsoft's discovery request as further set forth in this order. The communications between Acacia and the third party sellers are not protected by a common…
WALKER DIGITAL, LLC v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: November 6, 2014
State: United States
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit
Case Number: 13-1584
Getty Images (US), Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation
Filed: October 16, 2014
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Case Number: 1:2014cv07114
OPINION AND ORDER....Getty's September 5, 2014 motion for a preliminary injunction is denied. Microsoft's October 10, 2014 motion for leave to file a supplemental reply brief is denied. (Signed by Judge Denise L. Cote on 10/16/2014) (gr)
SimpleAir, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation et al
Filed: September 30, 2014
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Case Number: 2:2011cv00416
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Signed by Judge Rodney Gilstrap on 09/30/2014. (nkl, )
BUYERLEVERAGE EMAIL SOLUTIONS v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Filed: September 12, 2014
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case Number: 14-1385
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Filed: March 10, 2014
State: Washington
Court: Court of Appeals Division I
Case Number: 69694-7
Microsoft Corporation v. Amphus, Inc., et al.
Filed: October 31, 2013
State: Delaware
Court: Court of Chancery
Case Number: CA 8092-VCP
Microsoft Corporation v. Vadem, LTD, et al.
Filed: March 12, 2013
State: Delaware
Court: Supreme Court
Case Number: 290, 2012
Microsoft v. Franchise Tax Bd.
Filed: December 18, 2012
State: California
Court: Court of Appeal
Case Number: A131964
Microsoft Corp. v. Vadem, Ltd., et al.
Filed: April 27, 2012
State: Delaware
Court: Court of Chancery
Case Number: CA 6940-VCP
Microsoft asserted a total of eight claims, derivatively or directly, against defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, usurpation of corporate opportunity, rescission, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting. Defendants, various companies and an individual associated with the restructuring of Vadem, a computer technology company formed under the laws of the British Virgin Islands, contended that Microsoft lacked standing to bring derivative claims on behalf of Vadem. Defendants also argued,…
Candace Bettendorf v. Microsoft Corporation
Filed: December 22, 2009
State: Wisconsin
Court: Court of Appeals
Case Number: 2008AP003215
JOE COMES, RILEY PAINT, INC., an Iowa Corporation, SKEFFINGTON'S FORMAL WEAR OF IOWA, INC., an Iowa Corporation, and PATRICIA ANNE LARSEN vs. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation
Filed: November 20, 2009
State: Iowa
Court: Supreme Court
Case Number: 072063
JOE COMES, RILEY PAINT, INC., an Iowa Corporation, SKEFFINGTON'S FORMAL WEAR OF IOWA, INC., an Iowa Corporation, and PATRICIA ANNE LARSEN vs. MICROSOFT CORPORATION, a Washington Corporation
Filed: November 20, 2009
State: Iowa
Court: Supreme Court
Case Number: 072063
Interactive Retail Management, Inc. v. Microsoft Online, L.P.
Filed: August 20, 2008
State: Florida
Court: Second District Court of Appeal
Case Number: 2D07-2885
A & M SUPPLY CO V MICROSOFT CORP
Filed: February 28, 2008
State: Michigan
Court: Court of Appeals Unpublished
Case Number: 274164
Cox v Microsoft Corp.
Filed: February 5, 2008
State: New York
Court: Appellate Division, First Department
Case Number: 2703 105193/00
