Purzel Video GmbH v. Does 65, 66, 67, 70, 72, 73, 75, 78, 83, 84, 89, 90, 91, 100, 109, 110, 118, 122, 126, 131, 132, 134, 141, 142 and 145

Plaintiff: Purzel Video GmbH
Defendant: Does 65, 66, 67, 70, 72, 73, 75, 78, 83, 89, 90, 91, 100, 109, 110, 118, 122, 126, 131, 132, 134, 141, 142 and 145
 
Case Number: 1:2013cv01172
Filed: May 2, 2013
 
Court: Colorado District Court
Office: Denver Office
County: XX Outside US
Presiding Judge: Wiley Y. Daniel
Referring Judge: Michael E. Hegarty
 
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed#Document Text
May 6, 2013 15 Opinion or Order of the Court MINUTE ORDER. Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw Plaintiff's Motion and Memorandum for Leave to Take Discovery Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference 11 is granted. Plaintiff's Motion and Memorandum for Leave to Take Discovery Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference 4 is withdrawn. Motion to Amend Captions 9 is denied as moot. The Clerk of the Court will change the caption to conform to the Amended Complaint by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 05/06/13.(jjhsl, )
May 6, 2013 16 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting in part and denying in part 12 Motion for Leave to Take Discovery Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 05/06/13.(jjhsl, )
July 1, 2013 29 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER. ORDERED that Doe Nos. 90 and 131 are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and shall hereafter be taken off the caption by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 07/01/13. (jjhsl, )
July 18, 2013 32 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER. ORDERED that Doe No. 84 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and Doe Nos. 67, 132, 141, and 142 are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. These Defendants shall hereafter be taken off the caption by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 07/18/13. (jjhsl, )
August 6, 2013 34 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER. ORDERED that Doe No. 110 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and Doe No. 122 is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 08/06/13. (jjhsl, )
August 14, 2013 38 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER. ORDERED that Plaintiff's Dismissal of Does Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(A)(1)(A)(i) filed on August 14, 2013 (ECF No. 36) is MOOT by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 08/14/13. (jjhsl, )
November 12, 2013 61 Opinion or Order of the Court MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 58 Plaintiff's Motion and Memorandum for Default Judgment against Defendant Jesus Sanchez, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 11/12/2013. (mehcd)
December 29, 2013 69 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER. ORDERED that Defendant Bill Yates is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and shall hereafter be taken off the caption by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 12/29/13. (jjhsl, )
January 6, 2014 70 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER Affirming and Adopting Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge. ORDERED that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge 65 is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. ORDERED that Plaintiffs Amended Motion and Memorandum for Default Judgment Against Defendant Jesus Sanchez (ECF No. 62) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 01/06/14.(jjhsl, )
May 16, 2014 78 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER that the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge dated April 23, 2014 ECF No. 77 is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. In accordance therewith, it is ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion and Memorandum for Default Judgment Against Defendant Donald Biby ECF No. 73 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; namely, it is granted as to the request for a default judgment and for damages, and granted in part and denied in part as to the request for injunctive relief. it is ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in Plaintiffs favor against Defendant Donald Biby for direct copyright infringement of Plaintiffs copyrighted work as set forth in Count I of the Amended Complaint, by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 5/16/2014.(evana, )

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Search for this case: Purzel Video GmbH v. Does 65, 66, 67, 70, 72, 73, 75, 78, 83, 84, 89, 90, 91, 100, 109, 110, 118, 122, 126, 131, 132, 134, 141, 142 and 145
Search Blogs [ Justia BlawgSearch | Google Blogsearch ]
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Purzel Video GmbH
Represented By: Paul Alan Lesko
Search Blogs [ Justia BlawgSearch | Google Blogsearch ]
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Does 65, 66, 67, 70, 72, 73, 75, 78, 83, 89, 90, 91, 100, 109, 110, 118, 122, 126, 131, 132, 134, 141, 142 and 145
Search Blogs [ Justia BlawgSearch | Google Blogsearch ]
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]