Gianni Versace SpA v. Nahouray
| 2:2006cv03486 |
| June 7, 2006 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Unassigned |
| Other |
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
99
CONSENT TO PERMANENT INJUNCTION AND ORDER by Judge A. Howard Matz: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: 1. Defendant M.E.R ENTERPRISES, LLC, its parents, subsidiaries, relatedentities, divisions, officers, owners, shareholders, employees, affiliates, servants, representatives, agents, predecessors, assigns and successors in interest of any kind, and all persons, firms, entities, or corporations under their direction and control or in active concert or participation with them, are immediately and permanently enjoined (see document for further details). All causes of action as between VERSACE and EDMOND NAHOURAY are hereby dismissed with prejudice. (jp)
|
|
Filing
97
ORDER DISMISSING CASE BY VIRTUE OF SETTLEMENT by Judge A. Howard Matz re Notice of Settlement 96 , (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (se)
|
|
Filing
94
MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS before Judge A. Howard Matz: The Court has reviewed the parties' Stipulation to Continue 93 dated 10/22/2008 and ORDERS that the Final Pretrial Conference currently set for 10/27/2008 is CONTINUED to 11/3/2008 at 11:00 AM. The parties shall file the Revised Final Pretrial Conference Order, Witness List and Exhibit List by 10/31/2008 at 9:00 AM (see document for further details). (jp)
|
|
Filing
92
MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS before Judge A. Howard Matz: The Court has reviewed the proposed Final Pretrial Conference Order and the parties trial briefs, witness lists and exhibit lists. Some of the submissions fail to meet the requirements of Local Rule 16 and the Court's Scheduling and Case Management Order. The Court hereby ORDERS: 1) The parties shall jointly file a "Revised Final Pretrial Conference Order." The parties must heed the Court's requirements concerning the statem ent of affirmative defenses (section 7) by listing the elements of each affirmative defense and the key evidence Defendants rely on for each element of the defense. The parties must also consider whether Affirmative Defense No. 1 ("Goods Not Sub stantially Similar") is a defense that will be pursued at trial, considering the absence of any copyright claim. The parties shall jointly file a single Revised Witness List and a single Revised Exhibit List separately identifying with an asterisk those witnesses and exhibits they will call or use only if the need arises, as required by L.R. 16-5 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(3)(A). These documents must be filed by 10/24/2008. (jp)
|
|
Filing
43
MINUTES OF Status Conference held before Judge A. Howard Matz: Court orders the dates as indicated on the Further Scheduling and Case Management Order filed this date. (Case reopened. MD JS-5.) Court Reporter: Cindy Nirenberg. (jp) Modified on 4/23/2008 (jp).
|
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
| Search for this case: Gianni Versace SpA v. Nahouray | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
