AR Pillow Inc et al v. Cottrell
| AR Pillow Inc and Elizabeth Goutevenier |
| Annette Cottrell |
| 2:2011cv01962 |
| November 23, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Seattle Office |
| XX US, Outside District |
| Richard A Jones |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1125 |
| 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
73
ORDER GRANTING 64 MOTION TO WITHDRAW AND MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME by Judge Richard A Jones; Jury Trial is set for 8/19/2013. Dispositive motions are due by 5/30/2013. Defts' 68 Motion for Summary Judgment is TERMINATED. Attorney Eric He lmy is withdrawn as counsel for pltfs. The 54 MOTION to Dismiss under Rule 37, 56 MOTION to Compel and 65 MOTION for Attorney Fees and costs Under RCW 4.24.525, are all RENOTED: Noting Date 2/1/2013. See Order for specific details. (TF)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones. The court GRANT's special motion to strike Plaintiffs' state law claims. Dkt. # 43 . The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate plaintiffs' motion for extension of time and motion to strike the anti-SLAPP motion. Dkt. ## 47 , 51 . (CL)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER by Judge Richard A Jones. The court DENIES plaintiffs AR Pillow, Inc.'s and Elizabeth Goutevenier's motion for temporary restraining order, which the court has construed as a motion for preliminary injunction. Dkt. # 13 . (CL)
|
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 Washington Western 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.
