WILLIAM A. GRAHAM COMPANY v. HAUGHEY et al
2:2005cv00612 |
February 8, 2005 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
Philadelphia Office |
HARVEY BARTLE |
Copyright |
17 U.S.C. ยง 101 Copyright Infringement |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 306 MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION ORDER THAT THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF EXECUTION PROCEEDINGS AND TO APPROVE AOUNT OF BOND (DOC. NO.297)IS DENIED; DEFENDANTS EMERGENCY MOTION TO EXTEND STAY OF EXECUTION PROCEEDINGS (DOC. NO.298)IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE HARVEY BARTLE, III ON 6/30/2011. 6/30/2011 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(kk, ) (kk, ) |
Filing 287 AMENDED JUDGEMENT THAT THE MOTION OF THE PLAINTIFF WILLIAM A. GRAHAM COMPANY D/B/A THE GRAHAM COMPANY TO AMEND THE JUNE 28, 2006 JUDGMENT TO INCLUDE PREJUDGMENT AND POSTJUDGMENT INTEREST IS GRANTED AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE HARVEY BARTLE, III ON 5/12/10. 5/13/10 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(dp, ) |
Filing 279 ORDER THAT THE MOTION OF DEFENDANTS, THOMAS P. HAUGHEY AND USI MIDATLANTIC, INC., FOR A NEW TRIAL ON DAMAGES IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE HARVEY BARTLE, III ON 3/19/10. 3/19/10 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(dp, ) |
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 Pennsylvania 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
Search for this case: WILLIAM A. GRAHAM COMPANY v. HAUGHEY 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.