Olem Shoe Corporation v. Washington Shoe Corporation
Plaintiff: Olem Shoe Corporation
Defendant: Washington Shoe Corporation
Case Number: 1:2009cv23494
Filed: November 16, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Office: Miami Office
County: Miami-Dade
Presiding Judge: Paul C. Huck
Presiding Judge: John J. O'Sullivan
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: 17 U.S.C. ยง 0101 Copyright Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
January 28, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 553 ORDER requiring supplemental briefing on the issue of jurisdiction re: 525 MOTION to Alter Judgment filed by Olem Shoe Corporation. Signed by Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan on 1/28/2013. (mkr)
January 5, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 417 ORDER granting 400 Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment by Washington Shoe Corporation and denying 398 Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment by Olem Shoe Corporation on the infringement of the Rose Zebra Supreme copyright, but finding no separate statutory damages are available to Washington Shoe Company on account thereof. Signed by Judge Paul C. Huck on 1/5/2012.(jpt)
December 1, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 396 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 250 and 254 Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Paul C. Huck on 12/1/2011.(jpt)
October 8, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 201 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 179 Motion for Protective Order; denying 179 Motion for Sanctions. Signed by Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan on 10/8/2010. (mkr)
September 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 167 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 76 Plaintiff's Motion for the Issuance of Request to Register of Copyrights Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. § 411(b)(2). Signed by Judge Paul C. Huck on 9/3/2010. (asr)
July 16, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 122 ORDER on Informal Discovery Conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan on 7/16/2010. (tro)
July 6, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 117 ORDER overruling 115 Objections and Appeal of Magistrate's Orders. Signed by Judge Paul C. Huck on 7/6/2010. (asr)
June 18, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 110 ORDER re 88 Plaintiff's MOTION TO COMMISSION A PERSON BEFORE WHOM DEPOSITION UPON WRITTEN QUESTIONS MAY BE TAKEN filed by Olem Shoe Corporation. Signed by Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan on 6/18/2010. (tro)
June 3, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 96 ORDER on Informal Discovery Conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan on 6/3/2010. (tro)
April 2, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 47 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 28 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 24 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Paul C. Huck on 4/2/2010. (eg)
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 this case: Olem Shoe Corporation v. Washington Shoe Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Olem Shoe Corporation
Represented By: Jesus Sanchelima
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: Washington Shoe Corporation
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?