Aspex Group, Inc, et al v. Luxottica Group S.P.A., et al
| Aspex Group, Inc and Aspex Eyewear, Inc. |
| Luxottica Group S.P.A. and Luxottica of America, Inc. |
| 0:2022cv60877 |
| May 9, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Federico A Moreno |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. § 1114 Trademark Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 22
PAPERLESS ORDER granting #21 Motion for Clarification. Luxottica Group S.P.A., an Italian Corporation, shall file its response/answer to the complaint on or before September 6, 2022. Luxottica of America, Inc., an Ohio Corporation, shall file its response/answer to the complaint on or before July 8, 2022. Signed by Judge Federico A. Moreno on 7/7/2022. (lfk)
|
| Filing 21 Joint MOTION for clarification #19 Waiver of Service Executed [Joint Motion for Clarification Or, Alternatively, Correction of Deadlines Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(d)(3)] by Aspex Eyewear, Inc., Aspex Group, Inc. Responses due by 7/8/2022 (Nicodema, Michael) |
| Filing 20 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Luxottica of America, Inc. identifying Corporate Parent EssilorLuxottica USA Inc., Corporate Parent Oakley, Inc. for Luxottica of America, Inc. (Mazanec, Daniel) |
| Filing 19 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Aspex Group, Inc, Aspex Eyewear, Inc.. Aspex Group, Inc waiver sent on 6/15/2022, response/answer due 8/15/2022; Aspex Eyewear, Inc. waiver sent on 6/15/2022, response/answer due 8/15/2022. (Palacio, Vanessa) |
| Reset Deadlines Answer due 7/8/2022as to All Defendants Per DE#18. (cqs) |
|
Filing 18
PAPERLESS ORDER granting in part and denying in part #17 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to Complaint. Defendants shall file response to the complaint on or before July 8, 2022. Signed by Judge Federico A. Moreno on 6/3/2022. (lfk)
|
| Filing 17 Agreed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer to Complaint by Luxottica of America, Inc.. Attorney Alexandra Goodstone added to party Luxottica of America, Inc.(pty:dft). (Goodstone, Alexandra) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Michael Anthony Nicodema on behalf of Aspex Eyewear, Inc., Aspex Group, Inc. Attorney Michael Anthony Nicodema added to party Aspex Eyewear, Inc.(pty:pla), Attorney Michael Anthony Nicodema added to party Aspex Group, Inc(pty:pla). (Nicodema, Michael) |
| Filing 15 AFFIDAVIT signed by: Erika Cremeans - Lasalle Process Servers re #1 Complaint by Aspex Eyewear, Inc., Aspex Group, Inc (Palacio, Vanessa) |
|
Filing 14
PAPERLESS ORDER granting #10 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice, Consent to Designation, and Request to Electronically Receive Notices of Electronic Filing for Attorney Benjamin P. Gilford. Signed by Judge Federico A. Moreno on 5/12/2022. (mti)
|
| Filing 13 Corporate Disclosure Statement (Rule 7.1) by Aspex Eyewear, Inc., Aspex Group, Inc identifying Corporate Parent Gestion Optifer, Inc. for Aspex Group, Inc; Corporate Parent Aspex Eyewear International, Inc. for Aspex Eyewear, Inc. (Palacio, Vanessa) |
| Filing 12 Summons Issued as to Luxottica of America, Inc. (mee) |
| Filing 11 Summons Issued as to Luxottica Group S.P.A. (mee) |
| Filing 10 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice, Consent to Designation, and Request to Electronically Receive Notices of Electronic Filing for Benjamin P. Gilford. Filing Fee $ 200.00 Receipt # BFLSDC-15629816 by Aspex Eyewear, Inc., Aspex Group, Inc. Responses due by 5/25/2022 (Attachments: #1 Certification, #2 Text of Proposed Order)(Peral, Stephanie) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) Luxottica of America, Inc. by Aspex Eyewear, Inc., Aspex Group, Inc (Peral, Stephanie) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Filing Proposed Summons(es) Luxottica Group S.p.A by Aspex Eyewear, Inc., Aspex Group, Inc (Peral, Stephanie) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Vanessa Palacio on behalf of Aspex Eyewear, Inc., Aspex Group, Inc. Attorney Vanessa Palacio added to party Aspex Eyewear, Inc.(pty:pla), Attorney Vanessa Palacio added to party Aspex Group, Inc(pty:pla). (Palacio, Vanessa) |
| Filing 6 CORRECTED FORM AO 120 SENT TO DIRECTOR OF U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK (Attachments: #1 Complaint, #2 Exhibit) (nan) (Main Document 6 replaced on 5/10/2022) (nan). |
| Filing 5 FORM AO 120 SENT TO DIRECTOR OF U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK (Attachments: #1 Complaint, #2 Exhibit) (nan) |
| Filing 4 Bar Letter re: Admissions sent to attorney Benjamin P. Gilford, mailing date May 10, 2022, (pt) |
| Filing 3 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case. Venue on the Civil Cover Sheet does not match the initiating document. The Clerks Office confirmed Broward (Office - Ft Lauderdale) as the county with the filer. It is not necessary to re-file this document. (nan) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Federico A. Moreno. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. (nan) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants. Filing fees $ 402.00 receipt number AFLSDC-15623329, filed by Aspex Group, Inc, Aspex Eyewear, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Peral, Stephanie) |
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 Southern 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.
