Sprint Nextel Corporation et al v. AU Electronics, Inc. et al
| Sprint Nextel Corporation and Sprint Communications Company, L.P. |
| AU Electronics, Inc., Global Mobile Trading, Inc. d/b/a AU Express Cash 4 Electronics d/b/a A-U Express d/b/a AU, Inc., Umair Yasin and Adnan Vadria |
| 1:2012cv09095 |
| November 13, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| Harry D. Leinenweber |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act) |
| Plaintiff |
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
158
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order:For the reasons explained above, the Court grants the relief requested in Sprint's motion to enforce the settlement agreement and finds that defendants' notice of repudiation is without force or effect. 141 In light of the Court's enforcement of the settlement agreement, defendants' motions to dismiss and Sprint's motion for preliminary injunction are denied as moot. [17, 23, 60] Defendants' motion advance a hearing or decision on t he pending motions to dismiss is also denied as moot. 129 Simultaneously with the entry of this opinion, the Court will enter a signed stipulated order of dismissal. This case is therefore dismissed with prejudice. Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 1/23/2014:Mailed notice(srn, )
|
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.
