Free
Message: EDIG bid/ask = .1210 / .13 volume 313,383 @ 3:54pm
Reply New Message
Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
e.Digital Corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
ArcSoft, Inc., dba as Closeli and as
simplicam.
Defendant.
Case No. 3:15-cv-00056-JAH-JMA
PLAINTIFF E.DIGITAL
CORPORATION’S NOTICE OF
RELATED CASES
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Assigned to the Honorable Judge
John A. Houston
Courtroom 13B (13th Floor -
Annex)
Case 3:15-cv-00056-JAH-JMA Document 7 Filed 01/12/15 Page 1 of 4
PLAINTIFF E.DIGITAL CORPORATION’S Case No. 3:15-CV-00056-JAH-JMA
NOTICE OF RELATED CASES
-HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
750 B. STREET
SUITE 2510
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
TEL: 619.544.6400
FAX: 619.696.0323
TO THE COURT, THE PARTIES, AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:
Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 40.1(f) and/or in an abundance of caution,
Plaintiff, e.Digital Corporation (“Plaintiff” or “e.Digital”) and its counsel hereby
identify the following cases which may be considered related to the above-entitledmatter (“This Filed Case)”:
1) e.Digital Corporation v. Dropcam, Inc., Case Number: 3:14-cv-04922-
JST (“Dropcam Case”) (originally filed in the Southern District of California onJuly 1, 2014; transferred to the Northern District of California on or aboutNovember 5, 2014 pursuant to Court order; currently pending in the Northern District before the Honorable Judge Jon S. Tigar, Courtroom 9 - 19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102, Telephone Number: (415)522-2036).Both cases involve the following patents:
1) United States Patent No. 8,306,514, entitled “System and Method for
Managing Mobile Communications” (“the ’514 patent”).
2) United States Patent No. 8,311,522, entitled “System and Method for
Managing Mobile Communications” (“the ’522 patent”).
3) United States Patent No. 8,311,523, entitled “System and Method for
Managing Mobile Communications” (“the ’523 patent”).
4) United States Patent No. 8,311,524, entitled “System and Method for
Managing Mobile Communications” (“the ’524 patent”); and,
5) United States Patent No. 8,315,619, entitled “System and Method for
Managing Mobile Communications” (“the ’619 patent”).
However, the Dropcam Case also involves the following patent which is not asserted in This Filed Case:
1) United States Patent No. 8,315,618, entitled “System and Method for
Managing Mobile Communications” (“the ’618 patent”).
HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
750 B. STREET
SUITE 2510
SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
TEL: 619.544.6400
FAX: 619.696.0323
In good faith, e.Digital states that it does not believe that This Case and the Dropcam Case should be assigned to a single district court judge and/or that doing so will effect a saving of judicial effort or other economies given that:
1) Different, unrelated Defendants are involved in each case;
2) Different accused products are at issue and/or involved in each case;
and/or,
3) Different facts are at issue and/or involved in each case in light of the
fact that:
a) Different, unrelated Defendants are involved in each case;
b) The 618 patent is asserted in the Dropcam Case but is not
asserted in This Filed Case; and/or,
c) Different accused products are at issue.
Dated: January 12, 2015
Respectfully submitted,
HANDAL & ASSOCIATES
By: /s/Pamela C. Chalk
Anton N. Handal
Pamela C. Chalk
Attorneys for Plaintiff
e.Digital Corporation
22 Recommendations
Reply New Message
Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message
Share
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply