Cael Technologies (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Precise Voting, LLC. et al
| Cael Technologies (Pvt.) Ltd. |
| Precise Voting, LLC. and Votrite, LLC. |
| 2:2013cv01470 |
| March 20, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Central Islip Office |
| E. Thomas Boyle |
| Leonard D. Wexler |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 Copyright Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
90
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: SO ORDERED that the time to file objections to the recommendation of Magistrate Brown having passed without receipt of any objections thereto, the Report and Recommendation is hereby adopted. Plaintiff is aw arded actual damages in the amount of $475,000 and prejudgment interest, to be calculated by the Clerk of the Court, at the rate of nine percent (9%) per annum from January 9, 2007 through the date of judgment. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment as set forth above and to close the file in this action. Ordered by Judge Leonard D. Wexler on 6/22/2017. (Florio, Lisa)
|
|
Filing
76
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 75 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. For the reasons stated herein, the Court finds that Defendant VotRite's failure to obtain counsel constitutes a default and directs the Clerk of the Court to strike the A nswer from the docket, solely as it pertains to VotRite, and to enter VotRite's default. The Court further construes Plaintiffs Rule 12(c) motion as a motion for a default judgment and, as such, grants Plaintiff a default judgment against VotRit e on all of the claims contained in the Complaint. In addition, due to VotRite's Answer being stricken, the counterclaims pleaded by VotRite are dismissed. Plaintiff is directed to submit a proposed judgment, consistent with this opinion, within ten (10) days. Plaintiff is further directed to advise the Court, within ten (10) days,whether it intends to continue this action with respect to Defendants Precise New York and Precise Delaware. In the event Plaintiff does not intend to continue this action as to either of the remaining defendants, Plaintiff shall file a stipulation of discontinuance within ten (10) days. (Ordered by Judge Leonard D. Wexler on 9/26/2016.) (Fagan, Linda)
|
|
Filing
51
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Plaintiff's 44 Motion to Dismiss Defendants' counterclaims is denied. Plaintiff may renew its arguments for dismissal on a motion for summary judgment at the close of discovery. Ordered by Judge Leonard D. Wexler on 12/5/2014. c/m by cm/ecf. (Mahon, Cinthia)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 28 Motion to Dismiss: Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted to the extent that the Court applies the "injury rule" in determining when Plaintiff's copyright infringement claim accr ues. In doing so, any claim of copyright infringement based on acts allegedly taken by Defendants prior to March 20, 2010 is time-barred and hereby dismissed. To the extent that the Complaint alleges a claim for copyright infringement based on alleged acts by Defendants subsequent to March 20, 2010, it may proceed. In all other respects, Defendants' motion is denied. So Ordered by Judge Leonard D. Wexler on 2/12/2014. (Minerva, Deanna)
|
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 New York Eastern 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.
