Estelgia, LLC v. Plume Design, Inc.
| Estelgia, LLC |
| Plume Design, Inc. |
| 1:2025cv00618 |
| May 16, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware |
| Richard G Andrews |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 15, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER: The case is ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSED. The parties shall promptly notify the Court when the United Stated International Trade Commission action has been resolved so that this case may be reopened, and other appropriate action may be taken. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 7/15/2025. (nms)
|
|
Filing 6
SO ORDERED Granting #5 Unopposed Motion to Stay and [Proposed] Order. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 7/9/2025. (nms)
|
| Filing 5 Unopposed Motion to Stay and [Proposed] Order - filed by Plume Design, Inc.. (Schladweiler, Benjamin) Modified on 7/8/2025 (nms). |
| Case Assigned to Judge Richard G. Andrews. Please include the initials of the Judge (RGA) after the case number on all documents filed. Associated Cases: 1:25-cv-00614-UNA, 1:25-cv-00615-UNA, 1:25-cv-00616-UNA, 1:25-cv-00618-UNA (alb) |
| Filing 4 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: identifying Corporate Parent Estelgia Korea for Estelgia, LLC filed by Estelgia, LLC. (Farnan, Michael) |
| No Summons Issued. (slk) Modified on 5/19/2025 (nms). |
| Filing 3 Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) US 7,936,714 B1; US 11,246,016 B2; US 10,735,973 B2; US 10,531,518 B2; US 9,775,164 B2; US 9,277,591 B2. (slk) |
| Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (slk) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Patent Infringment with Jury Demand against Plume Design, Inc. (Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ADEDC-4689371) - filed by Estelgia, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10, #11 Exhibit 11, #12 Exhibit 12, #13 Civil Cover Sheet)(slk) |
| DEFICIENCY NOTICE issued by the Court to Plaintiff: Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 (b)(1), A party must: (1) file the disclosure statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court. Counsel is requested to supplement the docket with an appropriate Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement. (slk) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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
| Search for this case: Estelgia, LLC v. Plume Design, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Estelgia, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Michael J. Farnan |
| Represented By: | Brian E. Farnan |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Plume Design, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Benjamin J. Schladweiler |
| 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 | [ 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.
