Gary Joseph Lachman v. Chrysalis Music Group Inc et al
| Gary Joseph Lachman and Gary Valentine |
| Chrysalis Music Group Inc, Jiru Music Inc, Monster Music Publishing Corporation and Capitol Records Inc |
| 2:2005cv07138 |
| September 30, 2005 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Manuel L Real |
| Andrew J Wistrich |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 Copyright Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 2, 2005. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal of the entire action without prejudice, pursuant to Fed. R.Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(i) filed by plaintiff Gary Joseph Lachman. (CASE TERMINATED MD-JS6.) (pbap, ) |
Filing 9
STIPULATION AND ORDER by Judge Manuel L. Real : re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 . Defendant's Chrysalis Music Group, Inc., Jiru Music, Inc., and Monster Island Music Publishing Corporation shall have up to and including 12/12/2005 in which to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint of plaintiff Gray Joseph Lachman in the above-entitled action. Based upon the foregoing Stipulation of the parties, and for good cause appearing, IT IS SO ORDERED.(yl, )
|
| Filing 8 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by plaintiff Gary Joseph Lachman, upon Chrysalis Music Group, Inc. Lachserved on 10/6/2005, answer due 10/26/2005 The Summons and Complaint were served by personal service, by federal statute, upon David Ellman, Vice President. Due Dilligence declaration not attached. Original Summons not returned. (pbap, ) |
| Filing 7 PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT Executed by plaintiff Gary Joseph Lachman, upon Monster Music Publishing Corporation served on 10/12/2005, answer due 11/1/2005. The Summons and Complaint were served by certified mail service, by state statute, upon Codiko, Carroll, Guido & Groffman, agent for service of process. Due Dilligence declaration not attached. Original Summons not returned. (pbap, ) |
| Filing 6 STIPULATION for Extension of Time for defendant Chrysalis Music Group, Inc. to File Answer to 11/17/2005 re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 filed by defendant Chrysalis Music Group Inc. (pbap, ) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL RE: Copyright, Patent and Trademark Reporting Requirements Filed. (pbap, ) |
| Filing 4 PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT Executed by Plaintiff Gary Joseph Lachman, upon Chrysalis Music Group Inc served on 10/6/2005, answer due 10/26/2005. The Summons and Complaint were served by personal service, by federal statute, upon David Ellman, Vice President. Due Diligence declaration not attached. Original Summons not returned. (pbap, ) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO COUNSEL by Judge Manuel L. Real: This case has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Manuel L. Real. Counsel are advised that the Court expects strict compliance with the provisions of the LR and the Federeal Rules of Civll Procedure. (See document for further details0,(yl, ) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Gary Joseph Lachman. (rrey, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against defendants Chrysalis Music Group Inc, Jiru Music Inc, Monster Music Publishing Corporation, Capitol Records Inc.(Filing fee $ 250) Jury Demanded. , filed by plaintiff Gary Joseph Lachman.(rrey, ) |
| 20 Day Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 as to Chrysalis Music Group Inc, Jiru Music Inc, Monster Music Publishing Corporation, Capitol Records Inc. (rrey, ) |
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 California Central 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.
