Poulsen Roser A/S v. Jackson & Perkins Wholesale, Inc. et al
| Poulsen Roser A/S |
| Jackson & Perkins Wholesale, Inc., Jackson & Perkins Company, Park Seed Wholesale, Inc., Geo. W. Park Seed Co., Inc., J&P Acquisition Inc., Donald Hachenberger and Glenda Hachenberger |
| 1:2010cv01894 |
| March 25, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Amy J. St. Eve |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1121 Trademark Infringement |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
60
WRITTEN Opinion Signed by the Honorable Amy J. St. Eve on 11/15/2010: Plaintiff Poulsen Roser A/S ("Poulsen") filed a motion for reconsideration 48 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) and 60(b). The Court affirms its prior ruling and dismisses the case with prejudice as to Glenda Hachenberger, and without prejudice as to Donald Hachenberger. [For further details see minute order.] Mailed notice(kef, )
|
|
Filing
47
WRITTEN Opinion: Signed by the Honorable Amy J. St. Eve on 8/26/2010: Defendant Donald Hachenberger's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction 32 is granted without prejudice, and Defendant Glenda Hachenberger's Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction 34 is granted with prejudice. [For further details see minute order.] Donald Hachenberger and Glenda Hachenberger terminated.Mailed notice(kef, )
|
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 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.
