LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C v. LegalForce, Inc.
| LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C |
| LegalForce, Inc. |
| 5:2022cv03724 |
| June 24, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Virginia K DeMarchi |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1127 Trademark Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
Summons Issued as to LegalForce, Inc.. (dhm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2022)
|
|
Filing 5
Initial Case Management Scheduling Order with ADR Deadlines: Case Management Statement due by 9/20/2022. Initial Case Management Conference set for 9/27/2022 01:30 PM in San Jose, Courtroom 2, 5th Floor. (dhm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2022)
|
|
Filing 4
Civil Cover Sheet by LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C JS-CAND 44 (Rev 10/2020) civil cover sheet. (Abhyanker, Raj) (Filed on 6/24/2022)
|
|
Filing 3
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. A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 7/8/2022. (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2022)
|
|
Filing 2
Proposed Summons. (Abhyanker, Raj) (Filed on 6/24/2022)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against LegalForce, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACANDC-17292529.). Filed byLegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Abhyanker, Raj) (Filed on 6/24/2022)
|
|
# Electronic filing error. AO-CAND-120 Form is missing. Submit your document using Other Documents "Patent/Trademark Report". [err102] Re: #1 Complaint filed by Lega lForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C (dhm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2022)
|
|
Case has been randomly assigned to judge, however incorrect Civil Cover Sheet CAND 44 (Rev.06/17) used at case opening. Please complete and re-file as a separate docket entry correct Civil Cover Sheet JS-CAND 44 (Rev. 10/20 re. Re: #1 Complaint filed by LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C (bw, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2022)
|
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: LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C v. LegalForce, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: LegalForce RAPC Worldwide, P.C | |
| Represented By: | Raj Vasant Abhyanker |
| 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: LegalForce, Inc. | |
| 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.
