Arch Chemicals, Inc. v. Sherwin-Williams Company
Arch Chemicals, Inc. |
Sherwin-Williams Company |
1:2018cv00986 |
July 2, 2018 |
US District Court for the District of Delaware |
Wilmington Office |
XX US, Outside State |
Vacant Judgeship (2017) |
Mary Pat Thynge |
Patent |
35 U.S.C. ยง 271 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 2, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: identifying Corporate Parent Lonza Group AG, Corporate Parent Lonza America, Inc., Corporate Parent LG Acquisition Parent Corp. for Arch Chemicals, Inc. filed by Arch Chemicals, Inc. (fms) |
Filing 3 Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) 9,717,250 ;9,723,842. (fms) |
Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (fms) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT for PATENT INFRINGEMENT filed with Jury Demand against Sherwin-Williams Company - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0311-2412201.) - filed by Arch Chemicals, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits A and B, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(fms) |
Summons Issued with Magistrate Consent Notice attached as to Sherwin-Williams Company on 7/2/2018. Requesting party or attorney should pick up issued summons at the Help Desk, Room 4209, or call 302-573-6170 and ask the Clerk to mail the summons to them. (fms) |
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 Delaware 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.