Lickerish Limited v. Drjays.com, Inc. et al
| LICKERISH LIMITED |
| DOES 1 through 10 and Drjays.com, Inc. |
| 2:2018cv08877 |
| October 15, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Jacqueline Chooljian |
| Dolly M Gee |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 13, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 SCHEDULING MEETING OF COUNSEL [Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, 26(f)] by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 1/11/2019. Scheduling Conference set for 1/25/2019 at 9:30 a.m. (See order for details.) (kti) |
| Filing 13 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Drjays.com, Inc., (Bjorgum, A) |
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 with JURY DEMAND filed by Defendant Drjays.com, Inc..(Attorney A Eric Bjorgum added to party Drjays.com, Inc.(pty:dft))(Bjorgum, A) |
Filing 11
MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Dolly M. Gee: the Court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before 12/12/2018 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. As an alternative to a written response by plaintiff(s), the Court will consider the filing of one of the following, as an appropriate response to this Order To Show Cause, on or before the above date, as evidence that the matter is being prosecuted diligently: An answer by the defendant(s); or, Plaintiff's application for entry of default pursuant to Rule 55a of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of a responsive pleading or motion on or before the date upon which a response by plaintiff(s) is due. This action will be dismissed if the above-mentioned document(s) are not filed by the date indicated above. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk)
|
| Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Lickerish Limited, upon Defendant Drjays.com, Inc. served on 10/22/2018, answer due 11/13/2018. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Elliott Betesh - Authorized Agent for Service of Process in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by substituted service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons NOT returned. (Doniger, Stephen) |
|
Filing 9
INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dolly M. Gee. (kti)
|
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons issued re Complaint #1 as to defendant Drjays.com, Inc. (esa) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (esa) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dolly M. Gee and Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian. (esa) |
| Filing 5 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff LICKERISH LIMITED. (Doniger, Stephen) |
| Filing 4 REPORT ON THE FILING OF AN ACTION regarding a copyright (Initial Notification) filed by LICKERISH LIMITED. (Attachments: #1 Page 2 AO121, #2 Page 3 AO121)(Doniger, Stephen) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff LICKERISH LIMITED. (Doniger, Stephen) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff LICKERISH LIMITED, (Doniger, Stephen) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-22576777 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff LICKERISH LIMITED. (Attorney Stephen M Doniger added to party LICKERISH LIMITED(pty:pla))(Doniger, Stephen) |
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.
