newspaper
civil-litigation
intellectual-property
patent-litigation
trademark
federal-courts
court-watch
UpChat Files Patent/Trademark Notice in Suit Against Verizon Communications
25-cv-01265
C.D. Cal.
Advertisement
description
Case Summary
UpChat LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc. is a case filed in an unknown court with docket number 25-cv-01265. The current summary is a Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120). This form is used to notify the court of the filing of a patent or trademark application. The specific details of the form are not provided in the current summary.
Latest development
2:25-cv-01265 UpChat LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc.
Filing · April 24, 2026
A Notice of Filing of Patent was filed.
description View filingKey Issues
- • Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form
- • UpChat LLC
- • Verizon Communications Inc
smart_toy
Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records.
How we verify our work.
fact_check
Docket Snapshot
account_balance
Court
C.D. Cal.
Central District of California · 9th Circuit · CA
tag
Docket
Not captured
Civil
timeline
Stage
Active litigation
Active
event
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
new_releases
Latest Filing
2:25-cv-01265 Gary Wall v. FedEx Corporation et al
Other · Apr 28, 2026
newspaper
Coverage
2 articles
2 sources tracked
groups
Participants
2 Defendants
5 linked entities
gavel
Judge
Not assigned in feed
What the record shows
This case is tied to Central District of California, a federal district court in CA.
The newest docket activity we have is a other dated April 28, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes Verizon Communications Inc, FedEx Corporation and others.
Press monitoring has found 2 related articles from 2 distinct sources.
chronic
Updated 2 weeks, 4 days ago
The Story So Far
UpChat LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc. is a case filed in an unknown court with docket number 25-cv-01265.
The case is currently active, but the court and judge have not yet been assigned. The case involves a Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120), which was filed on April 24, 2026. This form is used to notify the court of the filing of a patent or trademark application.
The specific details of the form are not provided in the current summary. The filing of this form is a procedural step that does not necessarily indicate the substance of the case. it does suggest that UpChat LLC is seeking to protect its intellectual property rights against Verizon Communications Inc.
The case will likely move forward with the assignment of a judge and the scheduling of further proceedings. The next step will be for the court to assign a judge and schedule a status conference to discuss the case's progress and any outstanding issues.
The court may also require the parties to file additional pleadings or motions to clarify the case's status and any disputes between the parties.
smart_toy
Juryvine case narrative generated from the full docket timeline.
How we verify our work.
About This Court
Central District of California (C.D. Cal.) is a federal district court in the 9th Circuit, CA.
Advertisement
Case Timeline
2 events
info
Other
April 28, 2026
2:25-cv-01265 Gary Wall v. FedEx Corporation et al
A separate case, Gary Wall v. FedEx Corporation et al (2:25-cv-01265), was filed in the Eastern District of Michigan. This case is unrelated to UpChat LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc. but was mistakenly referenced in the original description.
description
Filing
April 24, 2026
2:25-cv-01265 UpChat LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc.
A Notice of Filing of Patent was filed.
Advertisement
show_chart
Coverage Timeline
newspaper
2 articles
Press Coverage
newspaper
2:25-cv-01265 UpChat LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc.
Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120) ( 15
Apr 24, 2026
1 min read
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more
Sources tracked
2 outlets · 2 articles
Timeline events
2 records on file
Last updated
2 days, 10 hours ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.