Tai v. Minka Lighting Incorporated
Plaintiff: Jen-Lung David Tai
Defendant: Minka Lighting Incorporated
Case Number: 2:2016cv02810
Filed: August 22, 2016
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: Eileen S Willett
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1338
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
February 13, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER granting 22 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Plaintiff shall have until 2/24/2017 to file an amended complaint. (See Order for details.) Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 2/13/2017. (MMO)
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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Tai v. Minka Lighting Incorporated
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jen-Lung David Tai
Represented By: Douglas Michael Schumacher
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Minka Lighting Incorporated
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.


Why Is My Information Online?