Ahmed v. Twitter, Inc. et al
| Naeem Ahmed |
| Twitter, Inc., John Doe, John Doe, 2 and John Doe, 3 |
| 1:2014cv10025 |
| January 7, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Boston Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Richard G. Stearns |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 44 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 16, 2014. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 Filing fee/payment: $ 400, receipt number 1bst041414 for 1 Complaint (Diaz, Carmen) |
| Filing 4 General Order 09-1, dated January 6, 2009 regarding the E-Government Act and Personal Identifiers entered. (Abaid, Kimberly) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Twitter, Inc.. Counsel receiving this notice electronically should download this summons, complete one for each defendant and serve it in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 4 and LR 4.1. Summons will be mailed to plaintiff(s) not receiving notice electronically for completion of service. (Abaid, Kimberly) |
| Filing 2 ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Richard G. Stearns assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Chief Magistrate Judge Leo T. Sorokin. (Abaid, Kimberly) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Naeem Ahmed. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits, # 2 Civil Cover Sheets)(Abaid, Kimberly) |
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 Massachusetts 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.
