Rothschild Digital Confirmation, LLC v Epay Systems, Inc.
Plaintiff: Rothschild Digital Confirmation, LLC
Defendant: Epay Systems, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2019cv01602
Filed: August 28, 2019
Court: US District Court for the District of Delaware
Presiding Judge: Maryellen Noreika
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 271
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 21, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 21, 2019 Filing 8 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: No Parents or Affiliates Listed filed by Epay Systems, Inc.. (Keller, Karen)
October 21, 2019 Filing 7 ANSWER to #1 Complaint, with JURY DEMAND by Epay Systems, Inc..(Keller, Karen)
September 23, 2019 Opinion or Order SO ORDERED re #6 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move, or otherwise respond to plaintiff's complaint to October 21, 2019 (Set/Reset Answer Deadlines: Epay Systems, Inc. answer due 10/21/2019). ORDERED by Judge Maryellen Noreika on 9/23/2019. (dlw)
September 20, 2019 Filing 6 STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME to answer, move, or otherwise respond to plaintiff's complaint to October 21, 2019 - filed by Epay Systems, Inc.. (Keller, Karen)
September 4, 2019 Case Assigned to Judge Maryellen Noreika. Please include the initials of the Judge (MN) after the case number on all documents filed. Associated Cases: 1:19-cv-01601-MN, 1:19-cv-01602-MN, 1:19-cv-01603-MN (rjb)
August 30, 2019 Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Rothschild Digital Confirmation, LLC. Epay Systems, Inc. served on 8/30/2019, answer due 9/20/2019. (Stamoulis, Stamatios)
August 29, 2019 Summons Issued with Magistrate Consent Notice attached as to Epay Systems, Inc. on 8/29/2019. 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. (amf)
August 28, 2019 Filing 4 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: No Parents or Affiliates Listed filed by Rothschild Digital Confirmation, LLC. (amf)
August 28, 2019 Filing 3 Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) U.S. 7,456,872 B2. (amf)
August 28, 2019 Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (amf)
August 28, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT - filed with Jury Demand against Epay Systems, Inc. - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0311-2718779) - filed by Rothschild Digital Confirmation, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(amf)

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 this case: Rothschild Digital Confirmation, LLC v Epay Systems, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Epay Systems, Inc.
Represented By: Nathan Roger Hoeschen
Represented By: Karen Elizabeth Keller
Represented By: Jeffrey Thomas Castellano
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 ]
Plaintiff: Rothschild Digital Confirmation, LLC
Represented By: Stamatios Stamoulis
Represented By: Richard Charles Weinblatt
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?