VDPP, LLC v. Panasonic Corporation of North America
Plaintiff: VDPP, LLC
Defendant: Panasonic Corporation of North America
Case Number: 1:2023cv02750
Filed: October 20, 2023
Court: US District Court for the District of Colorado
Presiding Judge: Charlotte N Sweeney
Referring Judge: Scott T Varholak
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 0001 Patent Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 14, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 14, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER granting Plaintiff's #12 Unopposed Motion to Reset Scheduling Conference and Related Deadlines. For good cause shown, the following deadlines are EXTENDED by 45-days, as follows: proposed protective order is due 1/22/24; joint proposed patent scheduling order is due 1/27/24. Further, the Scheduling Conference set for 12/20/23 is VACATED and RESET for 2/7/24 at 11:45 AM in Courtroom A 402 before Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. SO ORDERED, by Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak on 12/14/2023. Text Only Entry(stvlc5, )
December 14, 2023 Filing 14 SUMMONS Returned Executed by VDPP, LLC. Panasonic Corporation of North America served on 12/12/2023, answer due 1/2/2024. (Ramey, William)
December 13, 2023 Filing 13 MEMORANDUM regarding #12 Unopposed Motion to Reset Unopposed Motion to Reset Scheduling Conference and Related Deadlines. Motion #12 is referred to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak, by Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 12/13/2023. Text Only Entry (cnsja.)
December 13, 2023 Filing 12 Unopposed MOTION to Reset Unopposed Motion to Reset Scheduling Conference and Related Deadlines by Plaintiff VDPP, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Ramey, William)
December 7, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak for non-dispositive matters. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of Local Civ. R. 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions, (4) pursuant to Local Civ. R. 16.6 and at the discretion of the Magistrate Judge, convene such early neutral evaluation and/or settlement conferences and direct related procedures as may facilitate resolution of this case without the necessity of a motion or prior authorization of the undersigned. By Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney on 12/7/23. Text Only Entry (jdyne)
December 7, 2023 Filing 10 CASE REASSIGNED pursuant to #9 Consent to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge. All parties do not consent. This case is randomly reassigned to Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney. All future pleadings should be designated as 23-cv-02750-CNS. (Text Only Entry) (schap, )
December 6, 2023 Filing 9 CONSENT to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge by Plaintiff VDPP, LLC All parties do not consent.. (Ramey, William)
October 23, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER Setting Deadline for Filing Election Concerning Consent/Non-Consent to Magistrate Jurisdiction Form and Setting Scheduling Conference. Consent Form due by 12/6/2023. Proposed Protective Order due by 12/8/2023. Joint Proposed Patent Scheduling Order due 12/13/2023. Scheduling Conference set for 12/20/2023 11:00 AM in Courtroom A 402 before Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. By Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak on 10/23/2023. (schap, )
October 23, 2023 Filing 7 SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (efoga, )
October 20, 2023 Filing 6 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. Text Only Entry (efoga, )
October 20, 2023 Filing 5 Report re Patent/Trademark: Report on the filing of an action emailed (NEF) to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (efoga, )
October 20, 2023 Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. (Ramey, William)
October 20, 2023 Filing 3 NOTICE Request for Issuance of Summons on Panasonic by Plaintiff VDPP, LLC (Ramey, William)
October 20, 2023 Filing 2 NOTICE Notice of Report on the Filing of an Action Regarding a Patent (AO-120) by Plaintiff VDPP, LLC (Ramey, William)
October 20, 2023 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Panasonic Corporation of North America (Filing fee $ 402,Receipt Number ACODC-9354705)Attorney William P. Ramey, III added to party VDPP, LLC(pty:pla), filed by VDPP, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Civil Cover Sheet)(Ramey, William)

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 Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: VDPP, LLC v. Panasonic Corporation of North America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: VDPP, LLC
Represented By: William P. Ramey, III
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: Panasonic Corporation of North America
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?