Lone Wolf Distributors, Inc. v. BravoWare, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Lone Wolf Distributors, Inc.
Defendant: BravoWare, Inc. and SOPCOM, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2015cv00016
Filed: January 15, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office: CDA - Northern Office
County: Bonner - Northern
Presiding Judge: B. Lynn Winmill
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1114
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
May 2, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 129 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. The motion for attorney fees and to amend judgment (docket no. 121 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (alw)
January 2, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 119 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Court did not instruct the jury regarding the notice requirements of 15 U.S.C. § 1111 for the reasons expressed above. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (km)
June 9, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 73 AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER. (Discovery due by 10/27/2017. Mediation shall take place by 10/27/2017. Dispositive Motions due by 12/1/2017.). Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (st)
March 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 55 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the motion for sanctions (docket no. 43 ) is GRANTED. Sanctions are imposed on attorney Paul Reidl and on defendants Bravoware and Sopcom as set forth in the body of the Memora ndum Decision. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the plaintiff shall submit a petition for fees and costs consistent with this decision within twenty days from the date of this decision. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)
February 22, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 23 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff's motion to conduct limited jurisdictional discovery (docket no. 14 ) is GRANTED, and plaintiff is given 60 days to complete the requested discovery. Defendants' motion to dismiss (docket no. 17 ) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. It is granted to the extent it seeks to dismiss Count One under Rule 12(b)(6), but is denied in all other respects. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jp)
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 Idaho District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lone Wolf Distributors, Inc. v. BravoWare, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Lone Wolf Distributors, Inc.
Represented By: David Groesbeck
Represented By: Kevin W Roberts
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: BravoWare, 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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: SOPCOM, 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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?