Roll Hill LLC

General

Total Cases1

Active Cases1

Patents--

Courts--

TypeOperating Company

Elite Ratings

--

rollandhill.com

Ratings

Experience

Grade

Trend

DCT

--

--

--

PTAB

--

--

--

CAFC

--

--

--

Analytics

Cases

Litigated Patents

Ratings Trends

Recent Dockets

Entered	Case	Description
01/10/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	ORDER Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file any amended complaint by January 27, 2025. In accordance with Rule 1.D of the Courts Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, any amended complaint should be filed with a redline showing all differences between the original and revised filing. Plaintiff will not be given any further opportunity to amend the Complaint to address issues raised by the motion to dismiss. If Plaintiff amends, then the Court will deny the previously filed motion to dismiss as moot. By three weeks after the amended complaint is filed, Defendant shall file an answer or a new motion to dismiss. If Defendant files a new motion to dismiss, any opposition shall be filed within 14 days, and any reply shall be filed within seven days of any opposition. If no amended complaint is filed, then Plaintiff shall file any opposition to the motion to dismiss by January 27, 2025. Defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed by February 3, 2025. SO ORDERED. (Amended Pleadings due by 1/27/2025., Replies due by 2/3/2025., Responses due by 1/27/2025) (Signed by Judge Jennifer H. Rearden on 1/9/2025) (jca) (Entered: 01/10/2025) ORDER Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file any amended complaint by January 27, 2025. In accordance with Rule 1.D of the Courts Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, any amended complaint should be filed with a redline showing all differences between the original and revised filing. Plaintiff will not be given any further opportunity to amend the Complaint to address issues raised by the motion to dismiss. If Plaintiff amends, then the Court will deny the previously filed motion to dismiss as moot. By three weeks after the amended complaint is filed, Defendant shall file an answer or a new motion to dismiss. If Defendant files a new motion to dismiss, any opposition shall be filed within 14 days, and any reply shall be filed within seven days of any opposition. If no amended complaint is filed, then Plaintiff shall file any opposition to the motion to dismiss by January 27, 2025. Defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed by February 3, 2025. SO ORDERED. (Amended Pleadings due by 1/27/2025., Replies due by 2/3/2025., Responses due by 1/27/2025) (Signed by Judge Jennifer H. Rearden on 1/9/2025) (jca) (Entered: 01/10/2025)
01/10/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF DEFENDANT MICHAELIS BOYD, INC Plaintiff Roll & Hill, LLC, pursuant to Federal Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), hereby files this Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice as to Defendant Michaelis Boyd, Inc. in the above-styled cause. The Clerk of Court is directed not to close this case. SO ORDERED. Michaelis Boyd, Inc. terminated. (Signed by Judge Jennifer H. Rearden on 1/9/2025) (jca) (Entered: 01/10/2025) NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF DEFENDANT MICHAELIS BOYD, INC Plaintiff Roll & Hill, LLC, pursuant to Federal Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), hereby files this Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice as to Defendant Michaelis Boyd, Inc. in the above-styled cause. The Clerk of Court is directed not to close this case. SO ORDERED. Michaelis Boyd, Inc. terminated. (Signed by Judge Jennifer H. Rearden on 1/9/2025) (jca) (Entered: 01/10/2025)
01/07/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	***NOTICE TO COURT REGARDING NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL Document No. [35] Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, was reviewed and referred to Judge Jennifer H. Rearden for approval for the following reason(s): the plaintiff(s) filed their voluntary dismissal and it did not dismiss all of the parties or the action in its entirety. (tp) (Entered: 01/07/2025)
01/06/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. Identifying Corporate Parent HPGI Holdings, Inc., Corporate Parent HPGI Holdings Employee Stock Ownership Trust for HPG International, LLC. Document filed by HPG International, LLC..(Kritzer, Noam) (Entered: 01/06/2025)
01/06/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	DECLARATION of Noam J. Kritzer in Support re: [36] MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint.. Document filed by HPG International, LLC..(Kritzer, Noam) (Entered: 01/06/2025)
01/06/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: [36] MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. . Document filed by HPG International, LLC..(Kritzer, Noam) (Entered: 01/06/2025)
01/06/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. Document filed by HPG International, LLC. Responses due by 1/21/2025.(Kritzer, Noam) (Entered: 01/06/2025)
01/06/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff(s) and or their counsel(s), hereby give notice that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed, with prejudice against the defendant(s) Michaelis Boyd, Inc.. Document filed by Roll & Hill, LLC. Proposed document to be reviewed and processed by Clerk's Office staff (No action required by chambers)...(Rosen, Gary) (Entered: 01/06/2025) NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the plaintiff(s) and or their counsel(s), hereby give notice that the above-captioned action is voluntarily dismissed, with prejudice against the defendant(s) Michaelis Boyd, Inc.. Document filed by Roll & Hill, LLC. Proposed document to be reviewed and processed by Clerk's Office staff (No action required by chambers)...(Rosen, Gary) (Entered: 01/06/2025)
01/06/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	ORDER OF DISMISSAL AGAINST MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND THE LIGHTSTONE GROUP, LLC: The Court, having been advised at ECF No. 33 that Plaintiff and Defendants Marriott International, Inc. ("Marriott") and The Lightstone Group, LLC ("Lightstone") have reached a settlement in principle, hereby ORDERS that Defendants Marriott and Lightstone shall be DISMISSED from the above-captioned action, without prejudice to the right to reopen the action within 30 days of the date of this Order if the settlement is not consummated. To be clear, any application to reopen must be filed by the aforementioned deadline; any such application filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, requests to extend the deadline to reopen are unlikely to be granted. If the parties wish for the Court to retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court by the deadline to reopen to be "so ordered" by the Court. Pursuant to Paragraph 6.C of the Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases, unless the Court orders otherwise, the Court will not retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement unless it is made part of the public record. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all deadlines as to Defendants Marriott and Lightstone. All prior orders, dates, and deadlines in connection with Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Michaelis Boyd, Inc. and HPG International, LLC shall remain in effect. The Clerk of Court is further directed not to close this case. SO ORDERED. Marriott International, Inc. and The Lightstone Group, LLC terminated. (Signed by Judge Jennifer H. Rearden on 1/5/2025) (mml) (Entered: 01/06/2025) ORDER OF DISMISSAL AGAINST MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND THE LIGHTSTONE GROUP, LLC: The Court, having been advised at ECF No. 33 that Plaintiff and Defendants Marriott International, Inc. ("Marriott") and The Lightstone Group, LLC ("Lightstone") have reached a settlement in principle, hereby ORDERS that Defendants Marriott and Lightstone shall be DISMISSED from the above-captioned action, without prejudice to the right to reopen the action within 30 days of the date of this Order if the settlement is not consummated. To be clear, any application to reopen must be filed by the aforementioned deadline; any such application filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, requests to extend the deadline to reopen are unlikely to be granted. If the parties wish for the Court to retain jurisdiction for the purposes of enforcing any settlement agreement, they must submit the settlement agreement to the Court by the deadline to reopen to be "so ordered" by the Court. Pursuant to Paragraph 6.C of the Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases, unless the Court orders otherwise, the Court will not retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement unless it is made part of the public record. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all deadlines as to Defendants Marriott and Lightstone. All prior orders, dates, and deadlines in connection with Plaintiff's claims against Defendants Michaelis Boyd, Inc. and HPG International, LLC shall remain in effect. The Clerk of Court is further directed not to close this case. SO ORDERED. Marriott International, Inc. and The Lightstone Group, LLC terminated. (Signed by Judge Jennifer H. Rearden on 1/5/2025) (mml) (Entered: 01/06/2025)
01/02/25	Roll & Hill v. HPG Intl Inc 1:24-CV-07492 ( S.D. NY )	LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time addressed to Judge Jennifer H. Rearden from Solomon N. Klein dated January 2, 2025. Document filed by The Lightstone Group, LLC, Marriott International, Inc...(Klein, Solomon) (Entered: 01/02/2025)