The Lovesac Company v. Stitch Industries, Inc.
| The Lovesac Company |
| Stitch Industries, Inc. and Stitch Industries, Inc. doing business as Joybird |
| 2:2021cv09904 |
| December 23, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Mark C Scarsi |
| Karen L Stevenson |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 18, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 19 Second STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to 04/01/2022 re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 , Stipulation Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less) #18 filed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Platt, Brian) |
| Filing 18 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Stitch Industries, Inc. answer now due 2/18/2022, filed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company.(Platt, Brian) |
Filing 17
ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Brent P. Lorimer to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff The Lovesac Company and designating Alyssa Caridis as local counsel #13 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (lc)
|
|
Filing 16
ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Brian N. Platt to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff The Lovesac Company and designating Alyssa Caridis as local counsel #12 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (lc)
|
|
Filing 15
INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE MARK C. SCARSI upon filing of the complaint by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
|
|
Filing 14
NOTICE AND ORDER REGARDING TRANSFER AND/OR REASSIGNMENT OF PATENT CASE by Judge Dale S. Fischer. Case transferred from Judge Dale S. Fischer to Judge Mark C. Scarsi for all further proceedings. Case number now reads 2:21-cv-09904 MCS(KSx). (rn)
|
| Filing 13 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Brent P. Lorimer to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff The Lovesac Company (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-32558682) filed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Caridis, Alyssa) |
| Filing 12 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Brian N. Platt to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff The Lovesac Company (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-32558555) filed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Caridis, Alyssa) |
| Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company, upon Defendant Stitch Industries, Inc. served on 12/30/2021, answer due 1/20/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon CT Corporation, Registered Agent in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Caridis, Alyssa) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Brian N Platt on behalf on Plaintiff. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (ghap) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Brent P Lorimer on behalf on Plaintiff. A document recently filed in this case lists you as an out-of-state attorney of record. However, the Court has not been able to locate any record that you are admitted to the Bar of this Court, and you have not filed an application to appear Pro Hac Vice in this case. Accordingly, within 5 business days of the date of this notice, you must either (1) have your local counsel file an application to appear Pro Hac Vice (Form G-64) and pay the applicable fee, or (2) complete the next section of this form and return it to the court at cacd_attyadm@cacd.uscourts.gov. You have been removed as counsel of record from the docket in this case, and you will not be added back to the docket until your Pro Hac Vice status has been resolved. (ghap) |
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendant Stitch Industries, Inc. (ghap) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (ghap) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dale S. Fischer and Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson. (ghap) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company, identifying Fidelity Management and Research Co., LLC. (Caridis, Alyssa) |
| Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company. (Caridis, Alyssa) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company. (Caridis, Alyssa) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-32528059 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff The Lovesac Company. (Attachments: #1 Ex A, #2 Ex B, #3 Ex C, #4 Ex D, #5 Ex E, #6 Ex F, #7 Ex G, #8 Ex H, #9 Ex I) (Attorney Alyssa Margaret Caridis added to party The Lovesac Company(pty:pla))(Caridis, Alyssa) |
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.
