Scriptel Corporation v. MCT Technology, Inc.
Plaintiff: SCRIPTEL CORPORATION and Spriptel Corporation
Defendant: MCT TECHNOLOGY, INC.
Case Number: 8:2024cv00431
Filed: March 1, 2024
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Douglas F McCormick
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1114 Trademark Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 5, 2024 Filing 12 REPORT ON THE DETERMINATION OF AN ACTION Regarding a Patent or Trademark. (Closing) (es)
April 4, 2024 Filing 11 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Plaintiff Spriptel Corporation. Dismissal is with prejudice. (Hankin, Marc)
March 6, 2024 Filing 10 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Sarah A. OBrien. 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. (jtil)
March 6, 2024 Filing 9 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Genevieve M. Halpenny. 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. (jtil)
March 6, 2024 Filing 8 NOTICE OF PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION DUE for Non-Resident Attorney Michael A. Oropallo. 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. (jtil)
March 5, 2024 Filing 7 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant MCT Technology, Inc. (jtil)
March 5, 2024 Filing 6 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick. (Attachments: #1 CV11C) (jtil)
March 1, 2024 Filing 5 REPORT ON THE FILING OF AN ACTION Regarding a Patent or a Trademark (Initial Notification) filed by SCRIPTEL CORPORATION. (Hankin, Marc)
March 1, 2024 Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff SCRIPTEL CORPORATION. (Hankin, Marc)
March 1, 2024 Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff SCRIPTEL CORPORATION, identifying MCT TECHNOLOGY, INC.. (Hankin, Marc)
March 1, 2024 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff SCRIPTEL CORPORATION. (Hankin, Marc)
March 1, 2024 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-37012716 - Fee: $405, filed by Plaintiff SCRIPTEL CORPORATION. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A and B) (Attorney Marc E Hankin added to party SCRIPTEL CORPORATION(pty:pla))(Hankin, Marc)

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: Scriptel Corporation v. MCT Technology, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: SCRIPTEL CORPORATION
Represented By: Marc E Hankin
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: Spriptel Corporation
Represented By: Marc E Hankin
Represented By: Elodie Marie Bardon
Represented By: Genevieve Halpenny
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 ]
Defendant: MCT TECHNOLOGY, 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 ]

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?