Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. CoreRx, Inc.
Plaintiff: Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Defendant: CoreRx, Inc.
Case Number: 8:2022cv00784
Filed: April 1, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Presiding Judge: Steven D Merryday
Referring Judge: Amanda Arnold Sansone
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 20, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 20, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER granting #13--motion to stay; staying the action; directing Azurity to file a notice not later than seven days after an order resolves each related action; directing the clerk to administratively close the case. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 5/20/2022. (KRM)
May 18, 2022 Filing 13 Joint MOTION to Stay by Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Pollack, Woodrow) Modified text on 5/19/2022 (MCB).
May 11, 2022 Filing 12 WAIVER of service returned executed on 05/11/2022 by Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. as to All Defendants. (Pollack, Woodrow)
April 12, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ENDORSED ORDER granting #8 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting #9 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice; granting #10 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Attorneys Wendy Devine, Kristina Hanson, and Natalie Morgan may appear pro hac vice, subject to the requirement that counsel submit their Pro Hac Vice E-File Registration (see https://www.flmd.uscourts.gov/for-lawyers) within seven days of this order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone on 4/12/2022. (SFC)
April 12, 2022 Filing 10 MOTION for Natalie Morgan to appear pro hac vice, Special Admission fee paid, Receipt No. AFLMDC-19448866 for $150 by Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. (Pollack, Woodrow) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone.
April 12, 2022 Filing 9 MOTION for Kristina Hanson to appear pro hac vice, Special Admission fee paid, Receipt No. AFLMDC-19448781 for $150 by All Plaintiffs. (Pollack, Woodrow) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone.
April 12, 2022 Filing 8 MOTION for Wendy Devine to appear pro hac vice, Special Admission fee paid, Receipt No. AFLMDC-19448713 for $150 by All Plaintiffs. (Pollack, Woodrow) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone.
April 5, 2022 Filing 7 NOTICE to counsels Wendy Devine, Nicholas Halkowski, Tina Hanson, Natalie Morgan and Ty Callahan of Local Rule 2.01(c), Special Admission of Non-Resident Lawyer - File a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Co-counsel with filing rights may electronically file the motion on behalf of the non-resident lawyer or the motion may be filed on paper; Pay the Special Admission Fee; (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (BD)
April 5, 2022 Filing 6 Patent Report sent to Alexandria, VA. (Attachments: #1 Complaint, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C) (BD)
April 5, 2022 Filing 5 SUMMONS issued as to CoreRx, Inc. (BD)
April 4, 2022 Filing 4 NOTICE of a related action per Local Rule 1.07(c) by Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Related case(s): Yes (Pollack, Woodrow) Modified text on 4/4/2022 (MCB).
April 4, 2022 Filing 3 NOTICE of Local Rule 1.07(c) and Local Rule 3.02(a)(2). -Local Rule 1.07(c) requires lead counsel to promptly file a Notice of a Related Action that identifies and describes any related action pending in the Middle District or elsewhere. -Local Rule 3.02(a)(2) requires the parties in every civil proceeding, except those described in subsection (d), to file a case management report (CMR) using the uniform form at www.flmd.uscourts.gov. The CMR must be filed (1) within forty days after any defendant appears in an action originating in this court, (2) within forty days after the docketing of an action removed or transferred to this court, or (3) within seventy days after service on the United States attorney in an action against the United States, its agencies or employees. Judges may have a special CMR form for certain types of cases. These forms can be found at www.flmd.uscourts.gov under the Forms tab for each judge. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (DAY)
April 4, 2022 Filing 2 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge Steven D. Merryday and Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone. New case number: 8:22-cv-0784-SDM-AAS. (SJB)
April 1, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against CoreRx, Inc. with Jury Demand (Filing fee $402 receipt number AFLMDC-19415219) filed by Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Civil Cover Sheet, #5 Proposed Summons)(Pollack, Woodrow) Modified on 4/5/2022 to correct docket text (BD).

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 Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. CoreRx, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Represented By: Woodrow Heath Pollack
Represented By: Kristina M. Hanson
Represented By: Natalie Morgan
Represented By: Nicholas Halkowski
Represented By: Stephen Bernard Gillman
Represented By: Ty William Callahan
Represented By: Wendy L Devine
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: CoreRx, Inc.
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?