Kenrico LTD v. Evgeny Lapik
Plaintiff: Kenrico LTD
Defendant: Evgeny Lapik d.b.a. LAPIK, Evgeny Lapik and Evgeny Lapik an individual doing business as LAPIK
Case Number: 2:2019cv07705
Filed: September 5, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Maria A Audero
Referring Judge: Otis D Wright
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1125
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 31, 2019 Filing 16 NOTICE Re: Motion for Service via Email and for Leave to Take Immediate Discovery filed by plaintiff Kenrico LTD. (Lila, Ben)
October 30, 2019 Filing 15 The hearing on the MOTION for Order for Service #13 , scheduled for November 4, 2019 at 1:30 P.M., is hereby VACATED and taken off calendar. No appearances are necessary. The matter stands submitted, and will be decided upon without oral argument. An order will issue. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (sce) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
October 29, 2019 Filing 14 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed filed by plaintiff Kenrico LTD. upon Evgeny Lapik waiver sent by Plaintiff on 9/19/2019, answer due 11/18/2019. Waiver of Service signed by Evgeny Lapik. (Lila, Ben)
October 1, 2019 Filing 13 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Order for Service via Email and for Leave to Take Immediate Discovery Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference filed by plaintiff Kenrico LTD. Motion set for hearing on 11/4/2019 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D. Wright II. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Proposed Order) (Lila, Ben)
September 26, 2019 Filing 12 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Otis D. Wright, II: Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for an order to authorize alternative means of service and immediate limited discovery prior to a Rule 26(f) conference is DENIED. (lc)
September 24, 2019 Filing 11 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Order for Alternative Service by Email and for Leave to Take Immediate Discovery filed by plaintiff Kenrico LTD. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Proposed Order) (Lila, Ben)
September 13, 2019 Filing 10 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Kenrico LTDto Notice To Counsel Re: Copyright/Patent/Trademark (CV-31) - optional html form #8 (Lila, Ben)
September 9, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 9 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. Counsel are STRONGLY encouraged to review the Central Districts website for additional information. (SEE DOCUMENT FOR SPECIFIC FILING REQUIREMENTS AND INFORMATION. The parties may consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge appearing on the voluntary consent list. PLEASE refer to Local Rule 79-5 for the submission of CIVIL ONLY SEALED DOCUMENTS. CRIMINAL SEALED DOCUMENTS will remain the same. all proposed sealed documents must be submitted via e-mail to the Judges Chambers email address, EXCLUDING those submitted by pro se parties and IN CAMERA filings, which shall continue to comply with Local Rule 79-5.1. Please refer to the Judges procedures and schedules for detailed instructions for submission of sealed documents. (lc)
September 6, 2019 Filing 8 NOTICE TO COUNSEL RE: Copyright, Patent and Trademark Reporting Requirements. Counsel shall file the appropriate AO-120 and/or AO-121 form with the Clerk within 10 days. (car)
September 6, 2019 Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Evgeny Lapik. (car)
September 6, 2019 Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car)
September 6, 2019 Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge Maria A. Audero. (car)
September 5, 2019 Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Kenrico LTD. (Lila, Ben)
September 5, 2019 Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Kenrico LTD, (Lila, Ben)
September 5, 2019 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Kenrico LTD. (Lila, Ben)
September 5, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-24387737 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Kenrico LTD. (Attorney Ben T Lila added to party Kenrico LTD(pty:pla))(Lila, Ben)

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: Kenrico LTD v. Evgeny Lapik
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Evgeny Lapik d.b.a. LAPIK
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: Evgeny Lapik
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: Evgeny Lapik an individual doing business as LAPIK
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 ]
Plaintiff: Kenrico LTD
Represented By: Ben T Lila
Represented By: Joseph A Mandour, III
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?