Ideal Family Eye Care, Ltd. v. Kuza et al
Plaintiff: Ideal Family Eye Care, Ltd.
Defendant: Romuald Kuza and Ideal Eye Care, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2009cv01694
Filed: March 18, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Office: Trademark Office
County: Cook
Presiding Judge: Virginia M. Kendall
Presiding Judge:
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
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 Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ideal Family Eye Care, Ltd. v. Kuza et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ideal Family Eye Care, Ltd.
Represented By: Martin E Jerisat
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: Romuald Kuza
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: Ideal Eye Care, 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?