Advocacy Digital Media, LLC v. High Impact, LLC
Advocacy Digital Media, LLC |
High Impact, LLC |
1:2021cv05675 |
October 25, 2021 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
Franklin U Valderrama |
Trademark |
15 U.S.C. ยง 44 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 6, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 10 CERTIFICATE of Service Attorney Certification regarding Lanham Act Mediation Materials by David M Adler on behalf of Advocacy Digital Media, LLC (Adler, David) |
Filing 9 WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Advocacy Digital Media, LLC. High Impact, LLC waiver sent on 11/19/2021, answer due 1/18/2022. (Adler, David) |
Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On or before 01/10/2022 the parties shall file a joint initial status report. A template for the Joint Initial Status Report, setting forth the information required, may be found at http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Judges.aspx by clicking on Judge Valderrama's name and then again on the link entitled 'Joint Initial Status Report. Plaintiff must serve this Minute Entry on all other parties. If the defendant(s) has not been served with process by that date, plaintiff's counsel is instructed to file an individual status report indicating the status of service of process by the same deadline. The parties are further ordered to review all of Judge Valderrama's standing orders and the information available on his webpage. Mailed notice (Attachments: #1 Joint Status Report) (axc). |
Filing 7 MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials. (nsf, ) |
Filing 6 MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials (jg, ) |
Filing 5 MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA (jg, ) |
Filing 4 MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA. (nsf, ) |
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey Cole. Case assignment: Random assignment. (lxk, ) |
Filing 3 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Adler, David) |
Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Advocacy Digital Media, LLC by David M Adler (Adler, David) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Trademark Infringement filed by Advocacy Digital Media, LLC; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-18802065. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A Registration Certificate, #2 Exhibit B Plaintiff's Ad, #3 Exhibit C Defendant's Ad, #4 Exhibit D Plaintiff's website, #5 Exhibit E Letter, #6 Exhibit F Letter)(Adler, David) |
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
Search for this case: Advocacy Digital Media, LLC v. High Impact, LLC | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Advocacy Digital Media, LLC | |
Represented By: | David M Adler |
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: High Impact, LLC | |
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.