Samad Brothers, Inc. v. Bokara Rug Co. Inc
| Samad Brothers, Inc. |
| Bokara Rug Co. Inc |
| 1:2009cv05843 |
| June 25, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| John F. Keenan |
| None |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 Copyright Infringement |
| None |
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
144
OPINION AND ORDER: If presented at trial, Korenbaum's testimony would satisfy Plaintiffs burden to show that there is a reasonable likelihood that Kapoor authored and signed the Kapoor Errata Sheet. Defendants may present any other arguments with respect to the admissibility of the Kapoor Errata Sheet when the parties file motions in limine in advance of trial, which is set for January 14, 2013. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 5/8/2012) (jfe)
|
|
Filing
141
OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion in limine topreclude Kapoor's deposition testimony is denied. Additionally, while the errata sheet submitted by Plaintiff does not satisfy the requirements of Rule 902(3), the Court makes no ruling at this time regarding its preclusion or admissibility. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 1/9/2012) (rdz)
|
|
Filing
139
OPINION AND ORDER re: 102 MOTION for Sanctions (Corrected) filed by Samad Brothers, Inc. and 105 MOTION Objection to Magistrate Judge's Order of February 10. Defendants' objection to the Magistrate Judge's January 24,2011 o rder [Docket No. 105] is overruled. Defendants are directed to produce, in accordance therewith, the 199 copyright deposit photographs covering rug designs from India and Pakistan. Plaintiff's motion for sanctions and contempt [Docket No. 102] is denied. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 9/19/2011) (cd)
|
|
Filing
84
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER, that for the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that the Magistrates July 29th Order is clearly erroneous. Defendants Objection is therefore SUSTAINED. Plaintiff is directed to disclose, in accordance with this Opinion, the documents on the July 29, 2010 Privilege Log. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at docket number 41. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 12/13/10) (pl)
|
|
Filing
85
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER, that for the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiff's Objection to the Magistrate Judge's October 18, 2010 Order is OVERRULED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at docket number 54. The parties are directed to appear for a pre-motion conference on January 13, 2011 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 20-C. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 12/13/10) (pl)
|
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 Southern 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
| Search for this case: Samad Brothers, Inc. v. Bokara Rug Co. Inc | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Samad Brothers, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Mark Samuel Kaufman |
| 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: Bokara Rug Co. 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.
