Sober-Eye Inc. v. Brightlamp, Inc.
Plaintiff: Sober-Eye Inc.
Defendant: Brightlamp, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2020cv00790
Filed: June 10, 2020
Court: US District Court for the District of Delaware
Presiding Judge: Richard G Andrews
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 December 10, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 6, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 9 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Anthony E. Dowell - filed by Brightlamp, Inc.. (Devlin, Timothy)
August 6, 2020 Opinion or Order SO ORDERED, re #9 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Anthony E. Dowell, filed by Brightlamp, Inc.. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 8/6/2020. (nms)
July 31, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 8 STIPULATION to Extend Time to Respond - filed by Sober-Eye Inc.. (Egan, Brian) Modified on 7/31/2020 (nms).
July 31, 2020 Opinion or Order SO ORDERED, re #8 STIPULATION to Extend Time to Respond (*Reset Answer Deadlines: Brightlamp, Inc. answer due 8/17/2020). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 7/31/2020. (nms)
June 25, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 7 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to the Complaint - filed by Sober-Eye Inc.. (Egan, Brian) Modified on 6/25/2020 (nms).
June 25, 2020 Opinion or Order SO ORDERED, re #7 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to the Complaint (*Reset Answer Deadlines: Brightlamp, Inc. answer due 8/3/2020). Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 6/25/2020. (nms)
June 17, 2020 Opinion or Order Case Assigned to Judge Richard G. Andrews. Please include the initials of the Judge (RGA) after the case number on all documents filed. (rjb)
June 11, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Sober-Eye Inc.. Brightlamp, Inc. served on 6/11/2020, answer due 7/2/2020. (Blumenfeld, Jack)
June 11, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 5 Summonses Issued (please complete the top portion of the form and print out for use/service). (mal)
June 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 4 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: No Parents or Affiliates Listed filed by Sober-Eye Inc.. (mal)
June 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 3 Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) 9,888,845 B2. (mal)
June 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (mal)
June 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT - filed with Jury Demand against Brightlamp, Inc. - Magistrate Consent Notice to Pltf. ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number ADEDC-2986341.) - filed by Sober-Eye Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1-2, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(mal)

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: Sober-Eye Inc. v. Brightlamp, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sober-Eye Inc.
Represented By: Brian P. Egan
Represented By: Jack B. Blumenfeld
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: Brightlamp, Inc.
Represented By: Timothy Devlin
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?