847-705-7100   |    Sign In   |    Shopping Cart Cart (0)

DR Systems, Inc. v. Emageon Inc. et al




Lawsuit Details

RFC Case Number: P-D08-1732E
Court Case Number: 3:08-cv-01732-JAH-AJB
File Date: Monday, September 22, 2008
Plaintiff: DR Systems, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: John C. Jaczko of Jaczko Goddard
Raymond P. Niro, Raymond P. Niro Jr., Dina M. Hayes, Matthew G. McAndrews, Frederick C. Laney, Nicholas D. Dudziak of Niro Scavone Haller & Niro
Defendant: Emageon Inc.
Novarad Corporation
Erad Inc.
Cause: 35:271 Patent Infringement
Court: California Southern District Court
Judge: Judge John A. Houston
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Anthony J. Battaglia
Notes:
Patent Details:
Patent Information Available To Active Paid Subscribers Only
Already have an account? Login Now
Need an account? Register for a Free Trial



Docket Text

This may not be the most complete up-to-date docket information.
For daily updates on this case, sign-up for a Lawsuit Tracker.
See the box on the right side of this page for details on the Lawsuit Tracker


Date # Docket Text
9/22/2008 2 Summons Issued (joeh) (Entered: 09/23/2008)
9/22/2008 1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against all defendants ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 155269.), filed by DR Systems, Inc.(joeh) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/23/2008: # 1 Patent Letter) Letter Mailed (joeh). (Entered: 09/23/2008)

Download Case Documents



Get a copy of the official court documents from only $0.99




MONITOR THIS CASE WITH OUR EXCLUSIVE

LAWSUIT TRACKER

Automatic monitoring.
Email notification of any docket updates.
From $3.99/month.
Click Here






Home   |   About   |   Lawsuits   |   Register   |   Login   |   Terms of Use   |   Privacy Policy   |   Sitemap   |   RSS Feed   |   Contact

© Copyright 2010 RFC Express — All Rights Reserved — Presented By Intellectual Property Today

RFC Express provides access to public lawsuit filings retrieved from the U.S. Federal District Courts.
These lawsuits, and associated information should not be considered findings of fact or liability. Nor do they reflect the views of RFC Express or any of its employees.