Andre Borrows v. Spreadshirt, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Andre Borrows
Defendant: Does and Spreadshirt, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2016cv02064
Filed: March 25, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Rozella A. Oliver
Presiding Judge: Otis D. Wright
Nature of Suit: Copyright

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 63 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. Plaintiff(s) is ordered to show cause in writing no later than June 26, 2017 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. The Court will consider the filing of the following, as an appropriate response to this OSC, on or before the above date: Plaintiff's filing of a noticed motion for entry of default judgment for the defendant-Roderick Rodriguez. (smo)
April 17, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Otis D. Wright, II.The Court previously issued an order to show cause why Defendants Grigori Boudenkov, Barry Higgins, and Andrew Higgins should not be dismissed. (ECF No. 50.) Plaintiff filed a response to that order on April 5, 2017, asking for additional time to serve these three Defendants. (ECF No. 53.) The Court will allow Plaintiff until May 15, 2017, to serve these Defendants. If Plaintiff does not file proofs of service for these Defendants on or before May 17, 2017, the Court will dismiss them without prejudice without further notice. (smo)
March 28, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to SHOW CAUSE, no later than April 5, 2017, why the Court should not dismiss those three Defendants for failure to effect service of process within the Rule 4(m) period. The Court will discharge this Order upon the filing of a proof of service as to each Defendant. Failure to timely respond to this Order may result in the dismissal of this case without prejudice without further warning from the Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. (jy)
November 7, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE : RE SETTLEMENT by Judge Otis D. Wright, II:In light of the Notice of Settlement with Defendant Chase McDuffie, the Court hereby ORDERS the parties TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, by December 27, 2016, why settlement has not been finalized with this Defendant. No hearing will be held. The Court will discharge this Order upon the filing of a dismissal that complies with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. (lc)
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 this case: Andre Borrows v. Spreadshirt, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Andre Borrows
Represented By: Scott A Burroughs
Represented By: Stephen M Doniger
Represented By: David Shein
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: Does
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: Spreadshirt, Inc.
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?