Yelp Inc. v. Reviewvio Inc.
| Yelp Inc. |
| Reviewvio Inc. doing business as Dandy |
| 3:2023cv06508 |
| December 18, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| William Alsup |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 44 Trademark Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 26, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 CLERK'S NOTICE SCHEDULING INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ON REASSIGNMENT: Initial Case Management Conference set for 3/28/2024 11:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 12, 19th Floor. Joint Case Management Statement due by 3/21/2024. Parties may download Judge Alsup's standing orders from the Court's webpage: https://cand.uscourts.gov/judges/alsup-william-wha/. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (afm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/26/2023) |
Filing 12
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge William Alsup for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler no longer assigned to case, Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Signed by Clerk on 12/22/2023. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(mbc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/22/2023)
|
| Filing 11 CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (ejk, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/21/2023) |
| Filing 10 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Reviewvio Inc... (Wallis, Jenifer) (Filed on 12/21/2023) |
| Filing 9 STIPULATION re #1 Complaint, To Extend Time to Respond to Initial Complaint (L.R. 6-1) filed by Reviewvio Inc.. (Wallis, Jenifer) (Filed on 12/21/2023) |
| Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Yelp Inc.. Reviewvio Inc. served on 12/20/2023, answer due 1/10/2024. (Daire, James) (Filed on 12/20/2023) |
| Filing 7 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 3/14/2024. Initial Case Management Conference set for 3/21/2024 11:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom B, 15th Floor. (sec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/19/2023) |
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Reviewvio Inc.. (sec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/19/2023) |
| Filing 5 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 1/2/2024. (kmg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/19/2023) |
| Filing 4 Proposed Summons. (Daire, James) (Filed on 12/18/2023) |
| Filing 3 REPORT on the filing or determination of an action regarding trademark (cc: form mailed to register). (Daire, James) (Filed on 12/18/2023) |
| Filing 2 Certificate of Interested Entities by Yelp Inc. identifying Other Affiliate BlackRock, Inc., Other Affiliate The Vanguard Group, Inc for Yelp Inc.. (Daire, James) (Filed on 12/18/2023) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Reviewvio Inc. ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ACANDC-18949704.). Filed by Yelp Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit Exhibit G, #8 Civil Cover Sheet)(Daire, James) (Filed on 12/18/2023) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Yelp Inc. v. Reviewvio Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Yelp Inc. | |
| Represented By: | James Daire |
| 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: Reviewvio Inc. doing business as Dandy | |
| Represented By: | Jenifer C Wallis |
| 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.
