Netskope, Inc. v. Bitglass, Inc.
Plaintiff: Netskope, Inc.
Defendant: Bitglass, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2021cv00916
Filed: February 5, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Presiding Judge: Edward M Chen
Referring Judge: Virginia K DeMarchi
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
June 3, 2021 Filing 28 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Netskope, Inc.. (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 6/3/2021)
May 20, 2021 Filing 27 ADR Certification (ADR L.R. 3-5 b) of discussion of ADR options (Yorks, Ben) (Filed on 5/20/2021)
May 20, 2021 Filing 26 ADR Certification (ADR L.R. 3-5 b) of discussion of ADR options (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 5/20/2021)
May 19, 2021 Filing 25 ANSWER TO COUNTERCLAIM #19 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim byNetskope, Inc.. (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 5/19/2021)
April 27, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen granting #23 Stipulation. Response due 5/19/2021. (afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/27/2021)
April 27, 2021 Filing 23 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER for Extension of Time to Respond to Counterclaims filed by Netskope, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Thomas N. Millikan)(Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 4/27/2021)
April 7, 2021 Filing 22 NOTICE of Appearance by Alexis Paschedag Federico (Federico, Alexis) (Filed on 4/7/2021)
April 7, 2021 Filing 21 NOTICE of Appearance by David Craig McPhie (McPhie, David) (Filed on 4/7/2021)
April 7, 2021 Filing 20 NOTICE of Appearance by Ben Joseph Yorks (Yorks, Ben) (Filed on 4/7/2021)
April 7, 2021 Filing 19 BITGLASS, INC.S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND COUNTERCLAIMS ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand , COUNTERCLAIM against Netskope, Inc. byBitglass, Inc.. (Yorks, Ben) (Filed on 4/7/2021)
March 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER GRANTING #15 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT BITGLASS, INC. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT. Answer due 4/7/2021. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/15/2021.(afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/15/2021)
March 12, 2021 Filing 17 Rule 7.1 Disclosures by Bitglass, Inc. (Yorks, Ben) (Filed on 3/12/2021)
March 12, 2021 Filing 16 Certificate of Interested Entities by Bitglass, Inc. (Yorks, Ben) (Filed on 3/12/2021)
March 12, 2021 Filing 15 STIPULATION re #1 Complaint, STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT BITGLASS, INC. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT filed by Bitglass, Inc.. (Yorks, Ben) (Filed on 3/12/2021) Modified on 3/15/2021 (afmS, COURT STAFF).
February 26, 2021 Filing 14 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Netskope, Inc.. Bitglass, Inc. served on 2/24/2021, answer due 3/17/2021. (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 2/26/2021)
February 22, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 13 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ORDER IN REASSIGNED CASE: Initial Case Management Conference set for 6/10/2021 09:30 AM in San Francisco, - Videoconference Only. Joint Case Management Statement due by 6/3/2021. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 2/22/2021. (afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/22/2021)
February 17, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Edward M. Chen for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi no longer assigned to case, Reassignment Order signed by Clerk on 2/17/2021. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(bwS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2021)
February 17, 2021 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. (pmcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/17/2021)
February 17, 2021 Filing 10 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Netskope, Inc... (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 2/17/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 9 REPORT on the filing or determination of an action regarding Patent (cc: form mailed to register). (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 8 Summons Issued as to Bitglass, Inc.. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 7 Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 5/4/2021. Initial Case Management Conference set for 5/11/2021 01:30 PM in San Jose, Courtroom 2, 5th Floor. (dhmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 6 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. 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. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 2/19/2021. (mbcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/5/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 5 Rule 7.1 Disclosures by Netskope, Inc. (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 2/5/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 4 Certificate of Interested Entities by Netskope, Inc. re #1 Complaint, (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 2/5/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 3 REPORT on the filing or determination of an action regarding a Patent or Trademark (cc: form mailed to register). (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 2/5/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 2 Proposed Summons. (Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 2/5/2021)
February 5, 2021 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Bitglass, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0971-15539664.). Filed byNetskope, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Civil Cover Sheet)(Millikan, Thomas) (Filed on 2/5/2021)

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: Netskope, Inc. v. Bitglass, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Bitglass, Inc.
Represented By: Ben Joseph Yorks
Represented By: David Craig McPhie
Represented By: Alexis Paschedag Federico
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: Netskope, Inc.
Represented By: Thomas Nathan Millikan
Represented By: Joseph P. Reid
Represented By: Andrew Nicholas Klein
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?