RooR International BV et al v. VIP Skokie et al
| SREAM, INC. and ROOR INTERNATIONAL BV |
| VIP SKOKIE and JOHN DOE |
| 1:2019cv05066 |
| July 26, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1114 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 23, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by RooR International BV, Sream, Inc. as to VIP Skokie on 9/20/2019, answer due 10/11/2019. (Langone, Christopher) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang:In view of the answer deadline of 09/26/2019, as reported in the Status Report, the status hearing of 09/06/2019 is reset to 10/08/2019 at 9 a.m., with another status report due by 09/27/2019. Plaintiff shall promptly file the return of service on the docket.Emailed notice (slb, ) |
| Filing 7 STATUS Report by RooR International BV, Sream, Inc. (Langone, Christopher) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant VIP Skokie (jn, ) |
| Filing 6 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Initial status hearing set for 09/06/2019 at 9:15 a.m. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the attached status report requirements at least 3 business days before the initial status hearing. Plaintiff must still file the report even if not all Defendants have been served or have responded to requests to craft a joint report. read them anew even if counsel has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases. Because the Procedures are occasionally revised, counsel must read them anew even if counsel has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases.Mailed notice (Attachments: #1 Status Report Requirements) (slb, ) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP). The key features and deadlines are set forth in this Notice which includes a link to the (MIDP) Standing Order and a Checklist for use by the parties. In cases subject to the pilot, all parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the Standing Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the Standing Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the following documents (Notice of Mandatory Initial Discovery and the Standing Order) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (kb, ) |
| Filing 4 MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials. (kb, ) |
| Filing 3 MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA. (kb, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jn, ) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs ROOR INTERNATIONAL BV, SREAM, INC. by Christopher V. Langone (Langone, Christopher) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by ROOR INTERNATIONAL BV; Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-16077027. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A. USPTO- Notice of Recordation of Assignment, #2 Exhibit B. RooR Trademark Registrations, #3 Exhibit C. License Agreement, #4 Exhibit D. Agreement Scream Roor international, #5 Exhibit E. Product Purchased from Defendant, #6 Civil Cover Sheet)(Langone, Christopher) |
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 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.
