Kesey, LLC v. Francis et al
| 3:2006cv00540 |
| April 21, 2006 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Portland Office |
| Donald C. Ashmanskas |
| 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
151
ORDER - The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Acosta's Findings and Recommendation 147 . IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for attorney fees and costs pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 21 § 505 120 is DENIED. Defendants' motion to strike 134 is DENIED. Denying Motion for Attorney Fees 120 ; Denying Motion to Strike 134 ; Adopting Findings and Recommendation 147 . Signed on 10/19/2010 by Judge Garr M. King. (mja)
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment # 66 is GRANTED. Plaintiff is declared the sole owner of all rights in and to the Screenplay and any derivative works based on the Screenplay. The S&F Defendants& #039; Counterclaims are dismissed. The S&F defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment # 62 is GRANTED as to Count III of the Complaint and to the extent it limits Count II of the Complaint to conduct occurring two years before the Complaint was filed, and DENIED in all other respects. Does 1-100 are dismissed as defendants. Plaintiff is directed to submit a proposed form of judgment after conferring with defendants. Signed on November 2, 2009 by Judge Garr M. King. (kt)
|
|
Filing
101
Findings & Recommendation: Plaintiff's motion 66 for summary judgment should be GRANTED in its entirety. Plaintiff should be declared the sole owner of all rights in and to the Screenplay and any derivative works based on the Screenplay, and th e S&F Defendants' Counterclaims should be dismissed. The S&F Defendants' motion 62 should be GRANTED with regard to Count III of the Complaint and to the extent it limits Count II of the Complaint to conduct occurring two years before the Complaint was filed, and DENIED in all other respects. Additionally, Does 1-100 should be dismissed as defendants. Objections to the Court's findings are due on or before 8/31/09. If objections are filed a response to those objections is due within 10 days of the service date of the objections. Signed on 8/17/09 by Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta. (peg)
|
|
Filing
100
Order. Adopts the Opinion and Order of Magistrate Judge Acosta dated April 3, 2009 in its entirety. Defendant's Motion for Leave To File Authenticated Evidence(#96)is denied. Signed on 5/5/09 by Judge Garr M. King. (cib)
|
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 Oregon 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: Kesey, LLC v. Francis et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
