ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Patent litigation record

Company 19 cases

19 cases on record naming ContentGuard Holdings, Inc.: 10 as claimant, 9 as respondent. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Profile this company in Eureka
Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

19 cases on record

Cases on record
19
As claimant
10
As respondent
9
Patents held
Not recorded
Core tech
G06F7/04 · G06F17/30 · H04N7/16 · H04L29/06
Case no.PartiesRoleCourtFiledDurationOutcome
2019-1854 Google, LLC v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 9 May 2019 368 d Closed
2019-1795 Apple, Inc. v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 24 Apr 2019 383 d Closed
2019-1796 Google, LLC v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 24 Apr 2019 383 d Closed
2019-1797 Apple, Inc. v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 24 Apr 2019 383 d Closed
2016-2629 Apple, Inc. v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 13 Sep 2016 666 d Closed
2016-2557 Apple, Inc. v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 24 Aug 2016 686 d Closed
2016-2559 Google, Inc. v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 24 Aug 2016 686 d Closed
2016-2445 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Google, Inc. Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 9 Aug 2016 337 d Closed
2016-2446 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 9 Aug 2016 337 d Closed
2016-2448 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 9 Aug 2016 337 d Closed
2016-2430 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Google, Inc. Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 5 Aug 2016 341 d Closed
2016-2431 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Huawei Device USA, Inc. Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 5 Aug 2016 341 d Closed
2016-1916 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 26 Apr 2016 442 d Closed
2:16-cv-00176 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Huawei Device USA, Inc. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 1 Mar 2016 1101 d Procedural Outcome
2:15-cv-00128 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. DirecTV, LLC Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 3 Feb 2015 356 d Likely Settlement
2:14-cv-00061 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Google, Inc. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 5 Feb 2014 615 d Likely Settlement
3:14-cv-00498 Google, Inc. v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. Defendant N.D. Cal. 31 Jan 2014 437 d Likely Settlement
4:14-cv-00498 Google, Inc. v. Contentguard Holdings, Inc. Defendant N.D. Cal. 31 Jan 2014 437 d Case Transferred
2:13-cv-01112 ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. Plaintiff E.D. Tex. 18 Dec 2013 1198 d Procedural Outcome
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases naming ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

See what ContentGuard is protecting

Portfolio, claim scope and where its coverage is thin. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Analyse this portfolio
10,000 free credits to start

About this summary. This page summarises the litigation records within the coverage and snapshot dates stated here. Counts describe records in that dataset and do not, by themselves, establish the conduct, litigation success or legal position of any person or organisation.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed. The filing of a claim is not a court finding, and a docket marked “closed” does not by itself establish infringement, validity, settlement or a decision on the merits.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Third-party names and marks. Party, attorney, judge and company names appear for identification only. Company names may be trademarks of their owners; their appearance does not, by itself, imply affiliation with or endorsement by Patsnap.

Corrections and privacy requests. To report an inaccurate record or attribution, use the “Report an incorrect record” link on this page. For requests concerning your personal information, including, where applicable, the rights to access, rectify, erase, restrict or object to processing, use the “Privacy request” link. We assess requests under applicable law. See our Privacy Policy for details of this processing.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.