Optiv Security, Inc. v. Andrew Weiske et al
| Optiv Security, Inc. |
| Andrew Weiske and Does 1-10, inclusive |
| 8:2020cv01523 |
| August 17, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| David O Carter |
| John D Early |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 13, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 22
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge David O. Carter. Scheduling Conference set for 12/14/2020 at 08:30 AM before Judge David O. Carter. (See attached Order for complete details.) (kd)
|
| Filing 21 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Andrew Weiske, (Walker, Jessica) |
| Filing 20 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Answer to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #19 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 7.1-1 No Notice of Interested Parties and/or no copies. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (twdb) |
| Filing 19 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 with JURY DEMAND filed by Defendant Andrew Weiske.(Walker, Jessica) |
| Filing 18 Second STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Andrew Weiske answer now due 10/2/2020, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Andrew Weiske.(Walker, Jessica) |
| Filing 17 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Andrew Weiske answer now due 9/28/2020, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Defendant Andrew Weiske.(Attorney Jessica N Walker added to party Andrew Weiske(pty:dft))(Walker, Jessica) |
|
Filing 16
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge David O. Carter:PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. After issuing a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) (Dkt. 11) in this case, onAugust 28, 2020, the Court held a videoconference hearing for preliminary injunction. Having considered the parties arguments, the Court now ISSUES a preliminary injunction (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILED SEPCIFICS). The Court further ORDERS expedited discovery in this matter to ascertain the nature and extent of Defendants alleged misappropriation of Plaintiffs trade secrets. Thecase is hereby referred to Magistrate Judge John D. Early for discovery and settlement purposes. The Clerk shall serve this minute order on the parties. (lc)
|
| Filing 15 MINUTES OF Motion Hearing held and completed before Judge David O. Carter: Case called. Court and counsel confer. Defendants Request for 10 day extension of time to obtain counsel is DENIED by the Court. The Court GRANTS the Preliminary Injunction #5 . Court Reporter: Debbie Gale video. (lc) |
| Filing 14 SERVICE UNDER FRCP 5(b)(2)(D) Executed by Plaintiff Optiv Security, Inc., upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the Clerks Office in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Polishuk, Alexander) |
| Filing 13 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Optiv Security, Inc., re Order on Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, #11 served on 08/24/2020. (Polishuk, Alexander) |
|
Filing 12
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge David O. Carter: NOTICE OF ERRATA RE: TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER #11 . SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. (twdb)
|
| Filing 11 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge David O. Carter: ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. The Court SCHEDULES a video conference hearing for preliminary injunction on Friday, August 28, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. The Court HOLDS IN ABEYANCE Plaintiffs request for expedited discovery (see Appl. at 23). SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. (twdb) |
| Filing 10 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOLLOWING ASSIGNMENT OF CIVIL CASE TO JUDGE CARTER. (kd) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Service of Summons and Complaint Returned Executed (21 days), #3 . The following error(s) was found: Other error(s) with document(s): Incorrect event selected. Correct event to be used is Summons Request. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (ghap) |
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendant Andrew Weiske. (ghap) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge David O. Carter and Magistrate Judge John D. Early. (ghap) |
| Filing 5 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Temporary Restraining Order as to Order to Show Cause why Preliminary Injunction Should Not Issue filed by Plaintiff Optiv Security, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum ISO Ex Parte Application for TRO, #2 Declaration of Brian Lutz ISO Ex Parte Application, #3 Exhibit A ISO Brian Lutz Declaration, #4 Exhibit B ISO Brian Lutz Declaration, #5 Exhibit C ISO Brian Lutz Declaration, #6 Exhibit D ISO Brian Lutz Declaration, #7 Exhibit E ISO Brian Lutz Declaration, #8 Exhibit F ISO Brian Lutz Declaration, #9 Declaration of Alexander Polishuk ISO Ex Parte Application, #10 Exhibit G ISO of Alexander Polishuk Declaration, #11 Exhibit H ISO of Alexander Polishuk Declaration, #12 Exhibit I ISO of Alexander Polishuk Declaration, #13 Exhibit J ISO of Alexander Polishuk Declaration, #14 Exhibit K ISO of Alexander Polishuk Declaration, #15 Declaration of Duncan Cerone ISO Ex Parte Application, #16 Declaration of Brian Wrozek ISO Ex Parte Application, #17 Proposed Order ISO Ex Parte Application for TRO) (Polishuk, Alexander) |
| Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Plaintiff Optiv Security, Inc. identifying Optiv Security, Inc. as Corporate Parent. (Polishuk, Alexander) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS REQUEST-FILED as PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Optiv Security, Inc., upon Defendant Optiv Security, Inc. served on 8/17/2020, answer due 9/8/2020. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Defendant Andrew Weiske in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by method of service not specified.Original Summons NOT returned. (Polishuk, Alexander) Modified on 8/18/2020 (ghap). |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Optiv Security, Inc.. (Polishuk, Alexander) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-27665674 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Optiv Security, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A to Complaint Non-Disclosure Agreement, #2 Exhibit B to Complaint - AP Letter to Weise) (Attorney Alexander Polishuk added to party Optiv Security, Inc.(pty:pla))(Polishuk, Alexander) |
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.
