Semiconductor Devices and Image Data Processing & Generation and Pictorial Communication (Video/TV) Patent litigation record

Technology 35 cases

35 cases on record in Semiconductor Devices and Image Data Processing & Generation and Pictorial Communication (Video/TV). Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

35 cases on record

Cases on record
35
Classification
H01L27/146 · G06T1/60 · H04N23/40 · H04N25/00 · H04N25/78 · H04N5/76 · H04N5/228 · H04N5/235 · H04N3/15 · H04N5/335 · G06T1/00 · H04N1/028 · H04N1/19 · H04N25/706 · H01L31/10 · G06T3/00 · H04N5/262 · G06F3/048 · G06F3/14 · G06T3/40 · G06T11/60 · G09G5/00 · G06F1/16 · G06F3/033 · G09G5/14 · H03M11/04 · G06F3/023 · G06F3/041 · G06F3/0488 · G09G3/20 · G09G5/377
Courts involved
N.D. Tex. · D. Del. · W.D. Tex. · E.D. Va. · E.D.N.Y. · E.D. Tex. · D.N.J. · W.D. Wash. · D. Colo. · S.D. Tex. · C.D. Cal.
Case no.PartiesCourtFiledDurationOutcome
3:22-cv-02044 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Uniview Technology N.D. Tex. 15 Sep 2022 6 d Voluntary dismissal
1:22-cv-01056 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. DivioTec, Inc. D. Del. 11 Aug 2022 21 d Voluntary dismissal
6:22-cv-00811 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. ParkHelp USA, Inc. W.D. Tex. 25 Jul 2022 39 d Voluntary dismissal
1:22-cv-00619 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Fuho Technology Co., Ltd. W.D. Tex. 24 Jun 2022 0 d Other
1:22-cv-00713 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Logipix, Ltd. E.D. Va. 24 Jun 2022 20 d Likely Settlement
6:22-cv-00670 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Geovision, Inc. W.D. Tex. 24 Jun 2022 63 d Closed
6:22-cv-00630 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Videor E. Hartig, GmbH W.D. Tex. 16 Jun 2022 40 d Voluntary dismissal
1:22-cv-03415 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. IPVideo Corporation E.D.N.Y. 9 Jun 2022 28 d Voluntary dismissal
2:22-cv-00171 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Fortinet, Inc. E.D. Tex. 24 May 2022 72 d Voluntary dismissal
6:22-cv-00524 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. IDIS America Co., Ltd. W.D. Tex. 24 May 2022 98 d Closed
6:22-cv-00456 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Avycon W.D. Tex. 5 May 2022 64 d Likely Settlement
1:22-cv-00531 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Adaptive Recognition America Corporation D. Del. 26 Apr 2022 10 d Voluntary dismissal
2:22-cv-02391 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Commend, Inc. D.N.J. 26 Apr 2022 153 d Closed
6:22-cv-00414 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Advanced Technology Video, Inc. W.D. Tex. 25 Apr 2022 30 d Likely Settlement
6:22-cv-00393 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. LaVision, Inc. W.D. Tex. 18 Apr 2022 23 d Likely Settlement
1:22-cv-02011 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Vicon Industries, Inc. E.D.N.Y. 8 Apr 2022 25 d Likely Settlement
1:22-cv-00389 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Carrier Global Corporation D. Del. 25 Mar 2022 63 d Voluntary dismissal
1:22-cv-00344 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. 3xlogic, Inc. D. Del. 17 Mar 2022 120 d Voluntary dismissal
2:22-cv-00273 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Logitech, Inc. W.D. Wash. 7 Mar 2022 185 d Voluntary dismissal
1:22-cv-00484 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Vicon Industries, Inc. D. Colo. 25 Feb 2022 26 d Voluntary dismissal
3:22-cv-00790 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. IKEGAMI Electrontics (USA), Inc. D.N.J. 14 Feb 2022 120 d Voluntary dismissal
1:22-cv-00157 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Videology Imaging Solutions Inc. D. Del. 3 Feb 2022 41 d Voluntary dismissal
6:22-cv-00046 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated W.D. Tex. 12 Jan 2022 153 d Voluntary dismissal
6:21-cv-00959 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Arashi Vision, Inc. W.D. Tex. 16 Sep 2021 77 d Voluntary dismissal
6:21-cv-00960 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Hasselblad, AB W.D. Tex. 16 Sep 2021 245 d Voluntary dismissal
6:21-cv-00962 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Seiko Epson Corporation W.D. Tex. 16 Sep 2021 294 d Voluntary dismissal
4:21-cv-02996 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. LT Security, Inc. S.D. Tex. 15 Sep 2021 127 d Voluntary dismissal
6:21-cv-00923 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Thales E-Security Limited W.D. Tex. 8 Sep 2021 112 d Voluntary dismissal
1:21-cv-00098 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Flir Systems, Inc. E.D. Va. 26 Jan 2021 0 d Likely Settlement
4:20-cv-01987 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Amcrest Industries, LLC S.D. Tex. 5 Jun 2020 96 d Case Dismissed
6:20-cv-00502 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Arrow Electronics, Inc. W.D. Tex. 5 Jun 2020 159 d Voluntary dismissal
1:20-cv-00541 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Omnivision Technologies, Inc. D. Del. 22 Apr 2020 140 d Voluntary dismissal
2:20-cv-01681 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Chicony America Group, Inc. C.D. Cal. 20 Feb 2020 146 d Voluntary dismissal
1:19-cv-01940 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. Alarm.com Holdings, Inc. D. Del. 14 Oct 2019 177 d Voluntary dismissal
1:11-cv-01025 Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Sendai Nikon Corporation D. Del. 26 Oct 2011 1302 d Procedural Outcome
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases classified under Semiconductor Devices and Image Data Processing & Generation and Pictorial Communication (Video/TV). Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Where the claim space is crowded

Which patents are asserted most in this field, and which branches are still open.

Map this field
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.