Flowbee International, Inc. et al v. Google, Inc.
Flowbee International, Inc. and Flowbee Haircutter Limited Partnership |
Google, Inc. |
Google, Inc. |
Flowbee Haircutter Limited Partnership and Flowbee International, Inc. |
4:2010cv00668 |
February 18, 2010 |
US District Court for the Northern District of California |
Oakland Office |
XX US, Outside State |
Laurel Beeler |
Trademark |
15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act) |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
|
Filing 43 ERRATA re 42 Answer to Complaint and Counterclaim, by Google, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Galvin, Cheryl) (Filed on 2/22/2010) Modified on 2/23/2010 (cjl, COURT STAFF). |
Filing 41 ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 5/27/2010. Case Management Conference set for 6/3/2010 01:30 PM. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2010) |
|
Filing 37 NOTICE of Setting as to 11 MOTION to Dismiss 1 Complaint,, 29 Unopposed MOTION for Oral Argument Relating to Its Pending Motion to Dismiss Hearing re: 26 MOTION for Leave to File Reply Brief to Its Pending Motion to DismissUnopposed MOTION for Oral Argument Relating to Its Pending Motion to Dismiss Hearing re: 26 MOTION for Leave to File Reply Brief to Its Pending Motion to Dismiss. Parties notified. Motion Hearing set for 1/11/2010 at 10:00 AM before Judge Janis Graham Jack, filed. (sscotch, ) |
Filing 36 Mail Returned Undeliverable as to attorney Margaret Caruso re: 32 Order on Motion for Leave to File, filed. (Bar website reflects the same address) (dperez, ) |
Filing 33 PLAINTIFFS' SUR-REPLY in Support of 24 Response to Defendant Google, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Under Rule 12(b)(3), filed by Flowbee International, Inc., Flowbee Haircutter Limited Partnership. (srussell, ) |
Filing 30 Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File Sur-Reply in Support of Response to Motion to Dismiss by Flowbee International, Inc., Flowbee Haircutter Limited Partnership, filed. Motion Docket Date 11/5/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Bright, David) |
Filing 29 Unopposed MOTION for Oral Argument Relating to Its Pending Motion to Dismiss Hearing re: 26 MOTION for Leave to File Reply Brief to Its Pending Motion to Dismiss by Google, Inc., filed. Motion Docket Date 10/28/2009. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Caruso, Margaret) |
Filing 23 Notice of Filing of Official Transcript as to 21 Transcript. Party notified, filed. (vgano, ) |
Filing 22 AO 435 TRANSCRIPT ORDER FORM by Carl Butzer. This is to order a transcript of held on 09/23/09 before Judge Janis Graham Jack Court Reporter/Transcriber: Molly Carter, filed. (lcayce, ) |
|
Filing 15 INITIAL DISCLOSURES by Google, Inc., filed.(Babcock, Charles) |
Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher Goodpastor on behalf of Flowbee International, Inc., Flowbee Haircutter Limited Partnership, filed. (Bright, David) |
|
Filing 10 JOINT DISCOVERY/CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN by Flowbee International, Inc., Flowbee Haircutter Limited Partnership, filed.(Bright, David) |
Filing 9 MOTION for Margaret M. Caruso to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Google, Inc., filed. Motion Docket Date 10/5/2009. (mserpa, ) |
Filing 6 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Google, Inc., filed.(Babcock, Charles) |
Filing 4 RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to Google, Inc. served on 8/25/2009, answer due 9/14/2009, filed.(Bright, David) |
Filing 3 First CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Flowbee International, Inc., Flowbee Haircutter Limited Partnership, filed.(Bright, David) |
|
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
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.