Golden Scorpio Corp v. Steel Horse Saloon I et al
| Golden Scorpio Corp |
| Steel Horse Saloon I, Steel Horse Bar & Grill, Whabah, Inc., Steel Horse Saloon II, Steel Horse Saloon III, Steel Horse Saloon IV, Steel Horse Pub & Grill, Steel-Horse.com, Steel Horse Grill and Saloon, The Steel Horse Saloon I, Western Trails Ranch, Steel Horse Saloon V and The Steel Horse Saloon II |
| 2:2008cv01781 |
| September 29, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Trademark Office |
| Maricopa |
| G Murray Snow |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 15:1051 Trademark Infringement |
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
78
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED that Pla's 72 Motion for Default Judgment is DENIED.FURTHER ORDERED that Dft Steel Horse Saloon V is DISMISSED for failure to serve and lack of personal jurisdiction. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directe d to mail a copy of this Order to Greg and Debbie Coble at 893 Cheney Ave., Marion, OH 43302. FURTHER ORDERED that Pla show cause as to why the Court should not dismiss Dfts Steel Horse Saloon III, Steel Horse Pub & Grill, and The Steel Horse Saloon I, pursuant to FRCivP 4(m) for failure to timely serve. Pla is directed to file a memorandum doing so by 4/17/09. Failure to respond will be considered as consent to the dismissal of these parties. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 4/9/09. (SAT)
|
|
Filing
75
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Pla show cause as to why the Court should not dismiss Dft Steel Horse Saloon V pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) or, alternatively, for lack of personal jurisdiction. FURTHER ORDERED sett ing the Order to Show Cause/Evidentiary Hearing for 4/2/2009 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 602, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Judge G Murray Snow. Pla is directed to be prepared to present the evidentiary basis supporting service on and personal jurisdiction over Dft Steel Horse Saloon V. FURTHER ORDERED that Pla shall file a memorandum with the Court by 4/10/09, providing legal authority supporting: (1) the conclusion that service upon a business entity's owners in a stat e is sufficient to grant personal jurisdiction over the business entity itself; and (2) the conclusion that a business owner's contacts with a state may be imputed to the business when conducting a general jurisdiction analysis. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 3/26/09. (SAT)
|
|
Filing
69
ORDER denying 49 Motion for Default Judgment. That defendants Steel Horse Saloon IV, Steel-Horse.com, Steel Horse Grill and Saloon, and The Steel Horse Saloon II are DISMISSED for lack of personal jurisdiction. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 2/11/09.(DMT, )
|
|
Filing
57
ORDER directing Pla Show Cause as to why the Court should not dismiss Dfts Steel Horse Saloon IV, Steel-Horse.com, Steel Horse Grill and Saloon, and The Steel Horse Saloon II from the action for lack of personal jurisdiction. Plaintiff shall file a memorandum and the factual record supporting personal jurisdiction on or before 02/06/09. signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 01/27/09. (ESL)
|
|
Filing
56
ORDER that Defendant Steel Horse Bar & Grill be severed from the present action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21. That Defendant Steel Horse Bar & Grill's Motion to Dismiss 25 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Motion to Strike 26 is DENIED. Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 1/23/09.(DMT, )
|
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 Arizona 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.
