Crossford International, LLC et al v. Keith Handy Design Ltd. et al
Crossford International, LLC and Goodway Technologies Corporation |
Keith Handy Design Ltd. and Keith David Handy |
3:2022cv01083 |
August 26, 2022 |
US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
Kari A Dooley |
Patent |
35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 7 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 #4 Protective Order, #5 Order, #6 Report on Patent/Trademark Form, #2 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, #1 Complaint, filed by Goodway Technologies Corporation, Crossford International, LLC, #3 Electronic Filing Order Signed by Clerk on 8/29/2022. (Fanelle, N.) |
Filing 6 AO 120 Report on the Filing of an Action re: Patent Form Completed. (Fanelle, N.) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Keith David Handy, Keith Handy Design Ltd. ( Filing fee $402 receipt number ACTDC-7048234.), filed by Crossford International, LLC, Goodway Technologies Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-G, #2 Exhibit I-O, #3 Exhibit H (1 of 2), #4 Exhibit H (2 or 2), #5 Civil Cover Sheet)(Sharinn, Todd) |
Judge Kari A. Dooley 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
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.