Ronaldo Designer Jewelry, Inc. v. Tyree et al

Defendant: John Does Numbers 1 through 99 and Michael Tyree
Plaintiff: Ronaldo Designer Jewelry, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2013cv00093
Filed: May 9, 2013
Court: Mississippi Northern District Court
Office: Aberdeen Division Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Glen H. Davidson
Referring Judge: David A. Sanders
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

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 Mississippi Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ronaldo Designer Jewelry, Inc. v. Tyree et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: John Does Numbers 1 through 99
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: Michael Tyree
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 ]
Plaintiff: Ronaldo Designer Jewelry, Inc.
Represented By: Alec Michael Taylor
Represented By: Ellie Burnham Word
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.