Warren Miller Entertainment, Inc. v. Level 1 Productions, Inc.
Warren Miller Entertainment, Inc. |
Level 1 Productions, Inc. |
1:2009cv02254 |
September 21, 2009 |
US District Court for the District of Colorado |
Denver Office |
XX US, Outside State |
Christine M. Arguello |
Boyd N. Boland |
None |
15 U.S.C. ยง 1051 Trademark Infringement |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 43 ORDER Granting 42 Joint Stipulation for Dismissal with Prejudice. All claims asserted between Warren Miller Entertainment, Inc. and Level 1 Productions, Inc. in this action are dismissed with prejudice, each party to bear its own costs and attorney fees, by Judge Christine M. Arguello on 1/18/11. (mnf, ) |
Filing 32 ORDER. Warren Miller and Warren Miller Companys Motion to Intervene 11 is GRANTED. The Preliminary Injunction Hearing and associated briefing schedules are VACATED and Plaintiffs Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order [ 2] is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The instant matter is immediately stayed until arbitration between Plaintiff and Mr. Miller has been completed, and the case will be administratively closed. The Preliminary Injunction Hearing set for 10/22/2009, at 9:00 a.m. is VACATED. By Judge Christine M. Arguello on 10/20/2009.(sah, ) |
Filing 23 ORDER: Scheduling Conference set for 11/10/2009 09:00 AM in Courtroom A 401 before Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 10/5/09. (bnbcd, ) |
Filing 20 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Christine M. Arguello: granting 18 Motion for Leave; Status Conference held on 9/29/2009. Motion Hearing set for 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order on 10/22/2009 09:0 0 AM in Courtroom A 602 before Judge Christine M. Arguello. Supplemental briefing and plaintiff's response to motion for preliminary injunction are due October 19, 2009. Plaintiff's response to motion to intervene due no later than October 2, 2009. (Court Reporter Darlene Martinez) (pabcd) Modified on 10/1/2009 to add the motion that will be heard on the date of the Motion Hearing (sah2, ). |
Filing 8 ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, the Plaintiff's 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is DENIED without prejudice. On or before October 5, 2009, counsel shall jointly contact Judge Arguello's chambers, with their calendars ready, for the purpose of scheduling a hearing with regard to the remaining portion of the motion seeking a preliminary injunction. By Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 09/22/09.(msklc2, ) |
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 Colorado 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: Warren Miller Entertainment, Inc. v. Level 1 Productions, Inc. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Warren Miller Entertainment, Inc. | |
Represented By: | K. C. Groves, 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: Level 1 Productions, 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.