William J. Cook Company, Inc. v. SHW Group LLP et al

Plaintiff: William J. Cook Company, Inc.
Defendant: SHW Group LLP and Cambridge Strategics LLC
Case Number: 3:2013cv00921
Filed: February 28, 2013
Court: Texas Northern District Court
Office: Dallas Office
County: Dallas
Presiding Judge: David C Godbey
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114 Trademark Infringement
Jury Demanded By: None

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

Search for this case: William J. Cook Company, Inc. v. SHW Group LLP et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: William J. Cook Company, Inc.
Represented By: Patrick W Powers
Represented By: Peyton J Healey
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: SHW Group LLP
Represented By: Jennette E DePonte
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: Cambridge Strategics LLC
Represented By: Jennette E DePonte
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.