AMERICAN SECURITY COUNCIL FOUNDATION v. CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, INC. et al

Plaintiff: AMERICAN SECURITY COUNCIL FOUNDATION
Defendant: CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, INC. and FRANK GAFFNEY
Case Number: 1:2012cv01486
Filed: September 7, 2012
Court: District Of Columbia District Court
Office: Washington, DC Office
County: 11001
Presiding Judge: Rudolph Contreras
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:44
Jury Demanded By: None

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.

Access this case on the District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: AMERICAN SECURITY COUNCIL FOUNDATION v. CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, INC. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: AMERICAN SECURITY COUNCIL FOUNDATION
Represented By: Thomas Willcox Brooke
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: CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY, INC.
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: FRANK GAFFNEY
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 ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.