IP Verse

Greenthread, Llc V. On Semiconductor Corporation - 1:23-cv-00443

Explore the details of the Greenthread, Llc V. On Semiconductor Corporation case under case number 1:23-cv-00443 involving a cause of action for Patent Infringement. Review key information about the parties involved, the patents in question, and the docket entries.

Case Details

Case Number
1:23-cv-00443
Filing Date
Apr 21, 2023
Cause of Action
Patent Infringement
Status
-
Nature of Suit
Patent

Parties Involved in the Case

The following parties are involved in this case, with their respective legal representatives for the case.

NameRepresented By
Greenthread, LLC -
ON Semiconductor Corporation -
Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC -

Patents Involved in the Case

Patents not found - set an alert to get notified when patents are added.

Docket Entries

The Docket Entries section provides a chronological list of all significant filings and court actions in this case.

DateDocket EntryType

Set alerts for critical docket entry

Mar 15, 2024ORAL ORDER: The redacted filing (D.I. 65 ) is REJECTED because parts of it are redacted in its entirety. Absent a compelling reason, supported by a statement under oath by a party, redactions in their entirety are impermissible; redactions must be done so as to redact the least possible amount of the materials submitted. Failure to make a good faith attempt at such redactions may result in sanctions, the most common of which would be simply unsealing the entire filing. Redacting in its entirety a document, or parts of it, that contains publicly available materials is prima facie evidence of bad faith. A revised redacted filing is DUE within five business days. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 3/15/2024. (nms) (Entered: 03/15/2024)PACER Document
Mar 25, 2024ORAL ORDER: A hearing regarding the motions to stay (D.I. 49 in 23-cv-443-RGA-LDH; D.I. 36 in 23-cv-579-RGA-LDH) is now set for 4/24/2024, at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 6A. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 3/25/2024. Associated Cases: 1:23-cv-00443-RGA-LDH, 1:23-cv-00579-RGA-LDH(nms) (Entered: 03/25/2024)PACER Document
Mar 26, 2024SO ORDERED, re 77 STIPULATION and Order to Extend Time (*Reset Briefing Schedule: re 58 MOTION for Leave to Amend the Complaint. Reply Brief due 4/3/2024). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 3/26/2024. (nms)PACER Document
Apr 16, 2024Pro Hac Vice Fee - Credit Card Payment received for Elizabeth Bernard. ( re 84 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Elizabeth Bernard )( Payment of $ 50, receipt number ADEDC-4385740).(Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 04/16/2024)PACER Document
Apr 16, 2024SO ORDERED, re (D.I. 61 in 23-cv-579-RGA-LDH; D.I. 84 in 23-cv-443-RGA-LDH) MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Elizabeth Bernard, filed by Greenthread, LLC. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 4/16/2024. Associated Cases: 1:23-cv-00443-RGA-LDH, 1:23-cv-00579-RGA-LDH(nms)PACER Document
Apr 17, 2024Pro Hac Vice Attorney Elizabeth Bernard for Greenthread, LLC added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (oam)PACER Document
Nov 22, 2023Second Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement against ON Semiconductor Corporation and Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC - filed by Greenthread, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4)(Farnan, Brian) Modified on 11/22/2023 (nms). (Entered: 11/22/2023)Attachment
Apr 30, 2024NOTICE requesting Clerk to remove Kaylee Hoffner as co-counsel.. (Farnan, Brian) (Entered: 04/30/2024)PACER Document
May 2, 2024Letter to The Honorable Richard G. Andrews, from Michael J. Farnan, regarding rule to show cause orders. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 5/2/2024 (nms). (Entered: 05/02/2024)PACER Document
May 2, 2024Letter to The Honorable Richard G. Andrews, from Michael J. Farnan, regarding rule to show cause orders. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 5/2/2024 (nms). (Entered: 05/02/2024)Attachment
May 2, 2024Letter to The Honorable Richard G. Andrews, from Michael J. Farnan, regarding rule to show cause orders. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Farnan, Michael) Modified on 5/2/2024 (nms). (Entered: 05/02/2024)Attachment
Apr 30, 2024ORAL ORDER: Plaintiff filed a sealed declaration (D.I. 56 ) that had attached to it, among other things, a request for director review (Exh. B) and four agreements (Exhs. F, G, H, I), two with RPX and two with individual companies. Plaintiff filed a redacted version. (D.I. 65). In the redacted version, the five exhibits were 100% redacted. I stated that generally 100% redactions are impermissible, and that Plaintiff should refile with redactions of the least possible amount of the materials submitted. I pointed out the possibility of sanctions or of unsealing the filing if the redactions were not made in good faith. (D.I. 67 ). Plaintiff resubmitted a partially redacted version of Exh. B and did not further modify the 100% redactions of the other four exhibits. (D.I. 75 ). The first thing I noticed was the redaction of Intel from Exh. B. I thought this was strange, spent less than a minute googling, and came up with a story dated Feb. 28, 2024, by Annelise Gilbert in Bloomberg Law entitled, "Intel Link Blocks Semiconductor Patent Challenges, Director Told. The four agreements are 100% redacted even though large parts of them are boilerplate. I would accept that the licensees (other than RPX) and sublicensees could properly be redacted, maybe the dollar figures, banking information, etc.. The last set of redactions was supported by a declaration of Plaintiffs President stated at a very high level of generality. (D.I. 74). At this point, I cannot find that Plaintiff has been operating in good faith. Thus, I will set a show cause hearing at which I will consider issuing a sanction of $10,000 to $100,000. Before I set a date for that hearing, I need two things: (1) Plaintiff has ten days to give the redactions on Exhs. B, F, G, H, and I one more try; and (2) I need Plaintiff to identify the lawyer who is responsible for the significant waste of my time dealing with this issue. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 4/30/2024. (nms) (Entered: 04/30/2024)PACER Document