LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C. et al v. Trademark Engine LLC et al
| LegalForce RAPC Worldwide P.C., LegalForce, Inc. and Raj V. Abhyanker |
| Trademark Engine LLC, Travis Crabtree and Gray Reed & McGraw P.C. |
| 5:2017cv07303 |
| December 26, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Jose Office |
| Santa Clara |
| Howard R. Lloyd |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 0045 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
173
ORDER IN LIGHT OF CONDITIONAL NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO MODIFY PROTECTIVE ORDER; VACATING HEARING. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on September 27, 2019. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/27/2019)
|
|
Filing
168
ORDER. Plaintiff's request that the Motion to Modify Protective Order remain active on the calendar is granted. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on September 3, 2019. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/3/2019)
|
|
Filing
120
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, AS ALLEGED AGAINST DEFENDANT TRAVIS CRABTREE, WITH PREJUDICE; STRIKING NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL; DENYING AS MOOT MOTION TO STRIKE AND FOR DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on December 10, 2018. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/10/2018)
|
|
Filing
114
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; AFFORDING PLAINTIFF LIMITED LEAVE TO AMEND. The First Claim for Relief is dismissed without leave to amend. The Second Claim for Relief, to the extent based on TME's use of the word "professional," is dismissed without leave to amend, and to the extent alleged against Crabtree based on the privacy-related statements, is dismissed with leave to amend; in all other respects , the Second Claim for Relief is not subject to dismissal. The Third Claim for Relief is dismissed with leave to amend, with the exception of RAPC's claim for injunctive relief based on the alleged unauthorized practice of law by TME, which clai m is not subject to dismissal. RAPC is afforded leave to amend solely to the extent set forth above. Any Third Amended Complaint shall be filed no later than November 16, 2018. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on October 31, 2018. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/31/2018)
|
|
Filing
106
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS INITIAL COMPLAINT; AFFORDING PLAINTIFFS LEAVE TO AMEND. Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted and the First A mended Complaint is dismissed in its entirety. Plaintiffs are afforded leave to amend for purposes of curing the deficiencies identified. Any such Second Amended Complaint shall be filed no later than August 10, 2018, and plaintiffs may not add therein any new defendants or any new claims, without first obtaining leave of court. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on July 19, 2018. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/19/2018)
|
|
Filing
104
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on June 26, 2018. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/26/2018)
|
|
Filing
103
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SANCTIONS. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on June 14, 2018. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/14/2018)
|
|
Filing
99
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO FILE UNDER SEAL PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SANCTIONS; DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on May 9, 2018. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/9/2018)
|
|
Filing
86
ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO FILE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL; DIRECTIONS TO PLAINTIFFS; EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR DEFENDANTS TO FILE REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SANCTIONS. Plaintiffs are directed to file in the public record, no later than seven days from the date of this order, either: (1) an opposition to defendants' sanctions motion, as well as any evidence in support thereof; or (2) a renewed administrative motion to file under seal. T he deadline for defendants to file a reply to plaintiffs' opposition to the motion for sanctions is extended; defendants' reply shall be filed no later than seven days following the date on which plaintiffs serve defendants with their opposition. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on April 24, 2018. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/24/2018)
|
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.
