Deckers Outdoor Corporation v. Aleader Group, Inc. et al
| Deckers Outdoor Corporation |
| Aleader Group, Inc. and DOES 1-10, inclusive |
| 2:2023cv09841 |
| November 20, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Pedro V Castillo |
| Josephine L Staton |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Defendant Aleader Group, Inc. (jp) |
| Filing 15 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Aleader Group, Inc. filed by Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation. (Fountain, Jamie) |
| Filing 14 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation, upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon TRICIA ZANG, Office Manager authorized to accept service in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity (Fountain, Jamie) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Aleader Group, Inc #12 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: Proof of Service is lacking required information: Missing cited "STATUTE" on the proof of service of Summon/Complaint. (2) Requesting party shall file a new Request/Application with noted deficiencies corrected in order to have default reconsidered. (jp) |
| Filing 12 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Aleader Group, Inc. filed by Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation. (Blakely, Brent) |
| Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation, upon Defendant Aleader Group, Inc. served on 12/1/2023, answer due 12/22/2023. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon TRICIA ZANG, Office Manager authorized to accept service in compliance with statute not specified by personal service (Currie, Tara) |
| Filing 10 INITIAL STANDING ORDER for Civil Cases Assigned to Judge Josephine L. Staton. PLEASE READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. IT GOVERNS THIS CASE AND DIFFERS IN SOME RESPECTS FROM THE LOCAL RULES. (jp) |
| Filing 9 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) |
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Aleader Group, Inc. (car) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (car) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Josephine L. Staton and Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo. (car) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation. (Fountain, Jamie) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation, identifying Deckers Outdoor Corporation. (Fountain, Jamie) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation. (Fountain, Jamie) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-36438058 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation. (Attorney Jamie Fountain added to party Deckers Outdoor Corporation(pty:pla))(Fountain, Jamie) |
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.
