Cullen v. Netflix, Inc.

Plaintiff: Donald Cullen
Defendant: Netflix, Inc.
Case Number: 5:2011cv01199
Filed: March 11, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: San Jose Office
County: Placer
Presiding Judge: Howard R. Lloyd
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331
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
May 1, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 89 ORDER denying 75 Motion for Attorney Fees; denying 78 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 5/1/2013. (ejdlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/1/2013)
January 10, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 68 ORDER granting 53 Motion to Dismiss. All of the causes of action are dismissed without leave to amend. Since this Order effectively disposes of the entire case, the Clerk shall close this file upon entry of Judgment. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 1/10/2013. (ejdlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/10/2013)
September 25, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 59 ORDER VACATING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. The Case Management Conference scheduled for September 28, 2012, is VACATED. The court will reschedule the conference if necessary in the order addressing Defendant's dismissal motion. ***9/28/2012 CMC Deadlines terminated. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 9/25/2012. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/25/2012)
July 13, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER GRANTING 31 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint; Statement of Issues; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 7/13/12. Any amended complaint shall be filed no later than 30 days from the date this Order is filed. (ejdlc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/13/2012)
February 16, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER Regarding Supplemental Briefing, re 44 . Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on February 16, 2012. (ejdlc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/16/2012)
November 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 36 STIPULATION AND ORDER AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT CONTINUING MOTION HEARING AND CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE re 34 Stipulation. Set/Reset Deadlines as to: 31 MOTION to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint : Motion Hearing set for 1/6/2012 09:00 AM in Courtroom 1, 5th Floor, San Jose before Hon. Edward J. Davila. Case Management Conference set for 1/6/2012 10:00 AM in Courtroom 1, 5th Floor, San Jose. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 11/23/2011. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/23/2011)
June 14, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 21 STIPULATION AND ORDER GRANTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT re 19 Stipulation. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 6/14/2011. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/14/2011)

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: Cullen v. Netflix, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Donald Cullen
Represented By: John Joseph Fitzgerald, IV
Represented By: Jack Fitzgerald
Represented By: Gregory S Weston
Represented By: Gregory Steven Weston
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Netflix, Inc.
Represented By: David Frank McDowell
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 [ 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?