DCI Solutions, Inc. v. Urban Outfitters, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: DCI Solutions, Inc.
Defendant: Urban Outfitters, Inc. and DOES
Case Number: 3:2010cv00369
Filed: February 16, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of California
Office: San Diego Office
County: Los Angeles
Presiding Judge: Jan M. Adler
Presiding Judge: Irma E. Gonzalez
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
April 23, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 157 ORDER denying Defendant Urban Outfitters, Inc's 153 Motion for Re-Taxation of Costs. Signed by Judge Irma E. Gonzalez on 4/23/2012. (jah)
January 30, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 151 ORDER Denying Cross Motions for Attorneys' fees. The Court Denies Urbans 132 motion for attorneys fees and DCIs 136 motion for attorneys fees. Signed by Judge Irma E. Gonzalez on 1/30/12. (ecs)(jrd)
December 1, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 129 ORDER granting Defendant Urban Outfitters' 125 Motion to Dismiss Remaining Equitable Counterclaims. Court dismisses w/o prejudice Dft's 4th, 5th and 6th counterclaims for violation of California Business and Professions Code 17200 et seq., declaratory relief and rescission. Signed by Judge Irma E. Gonzalez on 12/1/2011. (jah)
April 5, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 60 ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's 47 Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Partial Summary Judgment. The Court grants the motion as it relates to DCI's fraud in the inducement claim and denies the motion as it relates to each of DCI's remaining claims. Signed by Judge Irma E. Gonzalez on 4/5/2011. (jer)(jrd)
May 6, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER granting DCI Solutions, Inc's 10 Motion to Dismiss Under FRCP 12(b)(6); denying DCI Solutions, Inc's 11 Motion to Strike Counterclaim Under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16. Court denies motion to strike Urban Ou tfitter's 1st, 2nd, and 4th counterclaims pursuant to the anti-SLAPP statute. Court grants motion to dismiss w/ respect to Urban Outfitter's 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th counterclaims. All of those counterclaims are dismissed w/ leave to amend. Urban Outfitter shall file an amended counterclaim w/in 21 days from the filing of this Order. Signed by Judge Irma E. Gonzalez on 5/6/2010. (jah) (jrl).
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: DCI Solutions, Inc. v. Urban Outfitters, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: DCI Solutions, Inc.
Represented By: Frank J Johnson, Jr
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: Urban Outfitters, Inc.
Represented By: Thomas J Stoddard
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: DOES
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?