Santa Clara Valley Historical Association v. Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc.
| Santa Clara Valley Historical Association |
| Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc. |
| 3:2022cv00395 |
| March 17, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Sarala V Nagala |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 501 Copyright Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 4, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 MOTION to Dismiss by Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc..Responses due by 5/25/2022 (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support Memorandum in Support of Motion, #2 Declaration of Lou Occhicone in Support of Motion, #3 Exhibit Exhibit 1 to Declaration of Lou Occhicone, #4 Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Declaration of Lou Occhicone, #5 Exhibit Exhibit 3 to Declaration of Lou Occhicone, #6 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Jachimowski, Christy) |
| Filing 11 Defendant Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc., ANSWER to #1 Complaint, with Affirmative Defenses by Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc..(Jachimowski, Christy) |
| Answer deadline updated for Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc. to 5/4/2022. See 10 order. (Bozek, M.) |
Filing 10
ORDER granting #9 Defendant's Consent Motion for Extension of Time until May 4, 2022 to respond to the Complaint. Counsel are reminded that pursuant to Local Rule 7(b)(3): "All motions for extension of time shall be filed at least three (3) business days before the deadline sought to be extended, except in cases in which compelling circumstances warranting an extension arise during the three days before the deadline. Any motion for extension of time filed fewer than three business days before the deadline sought to be extended shall, in addition to satisfying all other requirements of this Rule, set forth reasons why the motion was not filed at least three business days before the deadline in question." Future failures to comply with Local Rule 7(b)(3) may result in the denial of non-compliant motions for extension of time without prejudice to refiling of a compliant motion. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 4/14/2022. (Rennie, Carolyn)
|
| Filing 9 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time until May 4, 2022 to file Answer and/or Response to Complaint #1 Complaint, by Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc.. (Jachimowski, Christy) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Christy E. Jachimowski on behalf of Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc. (Jachimowski, Christy) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Santa Clara Valley Historical Association. Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc. served on 3/23/2022, answer due 4/13/2022. (Sanders, Craig) |
| Filing 6 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc.* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Craig B. Sanders Sanders Law Group* *100 Garden City Plaza Suite 500* *Garden City, NY 11530*. (Gould, K.) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of #2 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, #4 Protective Order, #1 Complaint, filed by Santa Clara Valley Historical Association, #3 Electronic Filing Order. Signed by Clerk on 3/18/2022.(Gould, K.) |
|
Filing 4
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 3/17/2022.(Gould, K.)
|
|
Filing 3
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 3/17/2022.(Gould, K.)
|
|
Filing 2
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 5/16/2022; Discovery due by 9/16/2022; Dispositive Motions due by 10/21/2022. Signed by Clerk on 3/17/2022.(Gould, K.)
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc. ( Filing fee $402 receipt number ACTDC-6868192.), filed by Santa Clara Valley Historical Association. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Original Photograph, #2 Exhibit Infringing Uses of the Photographs, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 REPORT ON THE FILING OR DETERMINATION OF AN ACTION OR APPEAL REGARDING A COPYRIGHT)(Sanders, Craig) |
| Request for Clerk to issue summons as to Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc.. (Sanders, Craig) |
| Judge Sarala V. Nagala added. (Freberg, B) |
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 Connecticut 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: Santa Clara Valley Historical Association v. Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Santa Clara Valley Historical Association | |
| Represented By: | Craig B. Sanders |
| 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: Chicken Soup for the Soul Entertainment, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Christy E. Jachimowski |
| 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.
