CytoSport, Inc. v. Select Milk Producers, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: CytoSport, Inc.
Defendant: Select Milk Producers, Inc. and Athlete's Honey Milk, LLC
Case Number: 2:2011cv01705
Filed: June 23, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: John F. Moulds
Presiding Judge: Morrison C. England
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 44
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 3, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 77 ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 8/30/2013 GRANTING 74 Stipulated Motion to Dismiss; DISMISSING this action without prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Michel, G)
August 6, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 73 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 8/6/13 ORDERING that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery and for Sanctions and Defendants' Motion to Compel Discovery in this matter are hereby dropped from the Court's calendar, without prejudice to their reinstatement upon proper notice. (Kastilahn, A)
July 19, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 71 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 7/19/13 ORDERING that Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery and for Sanctions and Defendants' Motion to Compel Discovery in this matter 61 and 65 is continued to 8/7/2013 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 8 (EFB) before Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
December 20, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 58 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 12/19/12. (Kastilahn, A)
December 10, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 56 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 12/7/12 ORDERING that Defendants' 42 motion for a protective order is DENIED; Plaintiff's 44 motion to compel is GRANTED; and Defendants' shall serve responses to plaintiff's first request for production ofdocuments and first interrogatories on or before 12/14/12. (Kastilahn, A)
November 13, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 50 STIPULATION and ORDER 47 signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 11/9/12 ORDERING the hearing date for 42 Motion for Protective Order is reset for 12/6/2012 at 11:00 AM in 8th floor courtroom (JFM) before Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds. Defendants' reply to plaintiff's opposition to defendants' motion for protective order is now due on 11/22/12. (Matson, R)
April 10, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 32 STIPULATION and ORDER 31 for Extension of Time signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 4/6/2012. Plaintiff's responsive pleading is now due on or before 4/18/2012. (Marciel, M)
March 9, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 30 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 3/8/12 GRANTING a 30-day extension within which Plaintiff shall respond to Defendants' Counterclaims. Plaintiff's responsive pleading is now due on or before 4/4/12. (Becknal, R)
January 19, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 22 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/18/12: Defendants response to the complaint is due on February 10, 2012. (Kaminski, H)
December 15, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 20 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 12/14/2011 re 19 ORDERING that the Defedants' response is now due on 1/11/2012. (Duong, D)
November 15, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 17 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 11/15/11 GRANTING a fourth 30-day extension, within which defendants shall respond to the complaint filed in this matter. Defendants' response is now due onDecember 12, 2011. (Becknal, R)
October 17, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 15 STIPULATION and ORDER 14 signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 10/14/11 ORDERING the defendants response to the complaint is now due on 11/10/11. (Matson, R)
September 12, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 13 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 9/12/11: Stipulation for 30-day extension of time is granted. Defendants response is now due on October 11, 2011. (Kaminski, H)
August 18, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 11 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 8/18/11: Plaintiff, Cytosport, Inc. and defendants, Select Milk Producers, Inc. and Athletes Honey Milk, LLC, hereby stipulate to an initial 30-day extension within which defendants shall respond to the complaint. Defendants response is now due on September 9, 2011. (Kaminski, H)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: CytoSport, Inc. v. Select Milk Producers, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: CytoSport, Inc.
Represented By: Glenn W. Peterson
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: Select Milk Producers, 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 ]
Defendant: Athlete's Honey Milk, LLC
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?