CLiC Goggles, Inc. v. Handsome Rewards
Plaintiff: CLiC Goggles, Inc.
Defendant: Handsome Rewards
3rd_party_defendant: Blue Gem Sunglasses, Inc.
3rd_party_plaintiff: Handsome Rewards
Case Number: 3:2013cv00541
Filed: February 7, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: San Francisco Office
County: Marin
Presiding Judge: Jon S. Tigar
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 13, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 50 STIPULATED INJUNCTION. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on August 12, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/13/2013)
July 29, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 41 ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND CONTINUING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE TO AUGUST 14 re 39 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Allow Plaintiff to File First Amended Complaint filed by Blue Gem Sunglasses, In c., 40 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER to Continue July 31, 2013 Case Management Conference filed by Blue Gem Sunglasses, Inc. Further Case Management Conference set for 8/14/2013 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on July 29, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/29/2013)
May 28, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER TO FILE STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL re 33 Notice filed by CLiC Goggles, Inc. Dismissal due by 7/12/2013. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 28, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/28/2013)
May 8, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER APPROVING REQUEST TO APPEAR BY TELEPHONE re 20 Amended Request filed by Blue Gem Sunglasses, Inc.. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 8, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/8/2013)
March 6, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER, Case reassigned to Hon. Jon S. Tigar. Magistrate Judge Nathanael M. Cousins no longer assigned to the case.. Signed by Executive Committee on 3/6/13. (ha, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/6/2013)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: CLiC Goggles, Inc. v. Handsome Rewards
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
3rd_party_defendant: Blue Gem Sunglasses, Inc.
Represented By: Michael D. Harris
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: CLiC Goggles, Inc.
Represented By: Miles Archer Woodlief
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: Handsome Rewards
Represented By: David Albert Gerber
Represented By: Brian E. Mitchell
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 ]
3rd_party_plaintiff: Handsome Rewards
Represented By: David Albert Gerber
Represented By: Brian E. Mitchell
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?