Anchor Law
General
Cases4
Challenger50%
Patent Owner50%
NPE50%
Practice Areas
DesignTransport., E-Comm.
Top Attorneys
Elite Ratings
DCTPTABCAFC
Analytics
Lawyers
Cases
Ratings Trends
Practice Areas
Recent Dockets
Entered | Case | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 12/22/24 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Neodrop by Bole Yuan (Yuan, Bole) (Entered: 12/22/2024) | |
| 12/17/24 | DECLARATION of Samantha Parrish regarding motion for default judgment [222] , memorandum in support of motion [223] (Attachments: # [1] Exhibit A, # [2] Exhibit B, # [3] Exhibit C, # [4] Exhibit D (Part 1 of 17), # [5] Exhibit D (Part 2 of 17), # [6] Exhibit D (Part 3 of 17), # [7] Exhibit D (Part 4 of 17), # [8] Exhibit D (Part 5 of 17), # [9] Exhibit D (Part 6 of 17), # [10] Exhibit D (Part 7 of 17), # [11] Exhibit D (Part 8 of 17), # [12] Exhibit D (Part 9 of 17), # [13] Exhibit D (Part 10 of 17), # [14] Exhibit D (Part 11 of 17), # [15] Exhibit D (Part 12 of 17), # [16] Exhibit D (Part 13 of 17), # [17] Exhibit D (Part 14 of 17), # [18] Exhibit D (Part 15 of 17), # [19] Exhibit D (Part 16 of 17), # [20] Exhibit D (Part 17a of 17), # [21] Exhibit D (Part 17b of 17))(Parrish, Samantha) (Entered: 12/17/2024) | |
| 12/17/24 | MEMORANDUM by Cozy Comfort Company LLC in support of motion for default judgment [222] - AMENDED (Parrish, Samantha) (Entered: 12/17/2024) | |
| 12/17/24 | MOTION by Plaintiff Cozy Comfort Company LLC for default judgment as to the Defaulting Defendants identified on the Second Amended Schedule A (Parrish, Samantha) (Entered: 12/17/2024) | |
| 12/17/24 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Cozy Comfort Company LLC of Defendant No. 70 (gutman99) (Parrish, Samantha) (Entered: 12/17/2024) | |
| 10/15/24 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sharon Johnson Coleman: In light of the allegations made by the parties in their briefings on this motion that the opposing party has made material misrepresentations and engaged in misconduct during the course of this case, Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction [25] is continued for determination of whether there has been violation(s) of Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under Rule 11(b), the court may sanction a party who presents to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paperwhether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocatingthat is presented for any improper purpose, present frivolous arguments, or is unsupported by evidence. Here, Plaintiff alleges in their reply [30] and response to Defendant's sur-reply [35] that Defendant has engaged in conduct in violation of the Court's TRO. Defendant alleges in their sur-reply that Plaintiff misrepresented their knowledge of and relationship to the Defendant in filing their complaint and motion for TRO [32] . Pursuant to Rule 11(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, an in-person status hearing is set for 11/5/2024 at 9:45 a.m. for parties to substantiate these claims of misconduct and misrepresentation and show cause as to why the conduct has not violated Rule 11(b). Parties are to file individual memoranda regarding these claims within three business days of the status hearing. Once this issue is fully briefed, the Court will take under advisement the possibility of Rule 11 sanctions as well as Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction. Mailed notice. (ym) (Entered: 10/15/2024) | |
| 08/22/24 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Ningbo Tuoluhze Auto Accessories Co., Ltd. as to Defendant 38 (Rothman, Joel) (Entered: 08/22/2024) |