Fashioncraft Excello LLC v. ST and Company LLC et al
| FASHIONCRAFT-EXCELLO LLC and Fashioncraft Excello LLC |
| ST & COMPANY LLC DBA SMOKE TOKES LLC, SMOKE TOKES LLC,, ST and Company LLC doing business as Smoke Tokes LLC and Smoke Tokes LLC |
| 2:2022cv07387 |
| October 11, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Andre Birotte |
| Jean P Rosenbluth |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 24
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSTION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT #23 by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Defendant ST & Company LLC shall have until January 4, 2023 to respond to Plaintiff Fashioncraft-Excello LLC's Complaint. (lom)
|
| Filing 23 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to January 4, 2023 re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant ST and Company LLC. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of James Rosenfeld in Support, #2 Proposed Order)(Vallens, Adrian) |
|
Filing 22
ORDER by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Granting Application of Non-Resident Attorney Nimra Azmi to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant ST and Company DBA Smoke Tokes LLC, designating Adrian F. Vallens as local counsel #18 . (gk)
|
|
Filing 21
ORDER by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Granting Application of Non-Resident Attorney James E. Rosenfeld to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant ST and Company DBA Smoke Tokes LLC, designating Adrian F. Vallens as local counsel #17 . (gk)
|
| Filing 20 NOTICE of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Pro Hac Vice Application RE: APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Nimra Azmi to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant ST and Company LLC (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-34329078) #18 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 83-2.1.3.3(d) Certificate of Good Standing not attached for every state court listed to which the applicant has been admitted. Other error(s) with document(s): DC GSC missing. (lt) |
| Filing 19 NOTICE of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Pro Hac Vice Application RE: APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney James E. Rosenfeld to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant ST and Company LLC (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-34328752) #17 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 5-4.3.4 Application not hand-signed. Other error(s) with document(s): Please note that electronic, image or stamp signatures are not allowed for either applicant or local counsel. See Instructions for Applicants (1). (lt) |
| Filing 18 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Nimra Azmi to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant ST and Company LLC (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-34329078) filed by Defendant ST and Company LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Vallens, Adrian) |
| Filing 17 APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney James E. Rosenfeld to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendant ST and Company LLC (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-34328752) filed by Defendant ST and Company LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Vallens, Adrian) |
|
Filing 16
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: The Court approves the parties' Stipulation #13 , and ORDERS that Defendant ST & Company LLC shall have until 12/5/2022 to respond to the Complaint. (gk)
|
| Filing 15 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Nimra H. Azmi. 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. (gk) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney James Rosenfeld. 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. (gk) |
| Filing 13 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to ST and Company LLC answer now due 12/5/2022, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant ST and Company LLC. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of James Rosenfeld in Support, #2 Proposed Order)(Vallens, Adrian) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant ST and Company LLC, (Attorney Adrian Forest Vallens added to party ST and Company LLC(pty:dft))(Vallens, Adrian) |
| Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE UNDER FRCP 5(b)(2)(D) Executed by Plaintiff Fashioncraft Excello LLC, upon Defendant ST and Company LLC served on 10/13/2022, answer due 11/3/2022; Smoke Tokes LLC served on 10/13/2022, answer due 11/3/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the Clerks Office in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Lantz, Jennifer) |
|
Filing 10
STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. (cb)
|
| Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendants ST and Company LLC, Smoke Tokes LLC. (sh) |
| Filing 8 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Andre Birotte Jr and Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. (sh) |
| Filing 5 REPORT ON THE FILING OF AN ACTION regarding a copyright (Initial Notification) filed by FASHIONCRAFT-EXCELLO LLC. (Lantz, Jennifer) |
| Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Plaintiff FASHIONCRAFT-EXCELLO LLC identifying Fashioncraft-Excello LLC as Corporate Parent. (Lantz, Jennifer) |
| Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff FASHIONCRAFT-EXCELLO LLC. (Lantz, Jennifer) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff FASHIONCRAFT-EXCELLO LLC. (Lantz, Jennifer) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-34128891 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff FASHIONCRAFT-EXCELLO LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit H, #9 Exhibit I, #10 Exhibit J, #11 Exhibit K, #12 Exhibit L, #13 Exhibit M, #14 Exhibit N, #15 Exhibit O) (Attorney Jennifer M Lantz added to party FASHIONCRAFT-EXCELLO LLC(pty:pla))(Lantz, Jennifer) |
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.
