Xerox Corporation v. The House of Portraits, Inc.

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit California Central District Xerox Corporation v. The House of Portraits, Inc.

Xerox Corporation v. The House of Portraits, Inc.

Plaintiff:	Xerox Corporation
Defendant:	The House of Portraits, Inc.
Case Number:	5:2016cv02545
Filed:	December 9, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge:	Michael W. Fitzgerald
Presiding Judge:	Kenly Kiya Kato
Nature of Suit:	Contract: Other

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
March 5, 2020	Filing 27 JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO WRITTEN STIPULATION by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff Xerox Corporation have Judgment entered against Defendant The House of Portraits, Inc. in the sum of $116,395.11, less payments of $21,500.00 plus interest at the rate of 18% per annum from November 17, 2019 to February 15, 2020 in the sum of $4,091.87 for a total judgment of $98,986.98. (iv)
March 21, 2017	Filing 22 ORDER ON DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald that the above-referenced lawsuit is dismissed, without prejudice, with the Court retaining jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 5, 2020

Filing 27 JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO WRITTEN STIPULATION by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff Xerox Corporation have Judgment entered against Defendant The House of Portraits, Inc. in the sum of $116,395.11, less payments of $21,500.00 plus interest at the rate of 18% per annum from November 17, 2019 to February 15, 2020 in the sum of $4,091.87 for a total judgment of $98,986.98. (iv)

March 21, 2017

Filing 22 ORDER ON DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald that the above-referenced lawsuit is dismissed, without prejudice, with the Court retaining jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)

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: Xerox Corporation v. The House of Portraits, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: The House of Portraits, Inc.
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: Xerox Corporation
Represented By:	Robert V McKendrick
Represented By:	William J Sexton
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?