Select Comfort Corporation v. Lateral Monopoly LLC, et al
| Select Comfort Corporation |
| Christopher Kelso, David Stephens and Lateral Monopoly LLC |
| 2:2011cv01488 |
| June 1, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Gregory G. Hollows |
| Frank C. Damrell |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1114 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
27
JUDGMENT dated *5/25/2012* in favor of Select Comfort Corporation against Lateral Monopoly, LLC pursuant to order signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 12/15/2011. (Michel, G)
|
|
Filing
25
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/16/11 RECOMMENDING that Select Comfort's motion for default judgment 21 be Granted in part and Denied in part; A permanent injunction be issued as to Lateral Mono poly; Select Comfort be awarded costs in the amount of $230.45; Select Comfort be awarded attorneys' fees in the amount of $19,349; and the case be closed. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr; Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 11/3/2011 ORDERING that the November 10, 2011 hearing on plaintiff's 21 motion for default judgment, filed October 11, 2011, is VACATED and the motion is submitted on the record. (Duong, D)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
