Third Degree Films Inc v. Does 1-2010 Featured Case
Plaintiff: Third Degree Films Inc
Defendant: Does 1-2010 and Doe 26
Case Number: 4:2011mc00002
Filed: July 7, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
Office: Lafayette Office
Presiding Judge: Andrew P Rodovich
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 5, 2012. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 6, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 13 OPINION AND ORDER denying as moot 4 Motion to Quash; denying 5 Motion for Hearing; denying 6 Motion to Quash; denying as moot 1 Motion to Quash. Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew P Rodovich on 10/06/11. (ksp) Modified on 10/7/2011 for text only (ksp).
August 8, 2011 Filing 12 REPLY to Response to Motion re 6 Amended MOTION to Quash Subpoena Served on Purdue University and Memorandum of Authorities filed by Doe 26. (Renfroe PHV, Tracie)
August 2, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER granting 9 Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Ira M Siegel for Third Degree Films Inc. Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew P Rodovich on 8/2/2011. (tc)
July 29, 2011 Filing 10 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to 6 Amended MOTION to Quash Subpoena Served on Purdue University and Memorandum of Authorities filed by Third Degree Films Inc. (ksp)
July 29, 2011 Filing 9 APPLICATION for Attorney Ira M Siegel to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Third Degree Films Inc ; Receipt #4000090. (ksp)
July 22, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER granting 7 Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Attorney Tracie J Renfroe PHV for Doe 26. Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew P Rodovich on 7/22/2011. (tc)
July 15, 2011 Filing 7 APPLICATION for Attorney Tracie J Renfroe to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Doe No 26 ; Receipt #4000087. (ksp)
July 12, 2011 Filing 6 Amended MOTION to Quash Subpoena Served on Purdue University and Memorandum of Authorities by Defendant Doe 26. (Modesitt, Raymond)
July 8, 2011 Filing 5 MOTION for Hearing re 4 MOTION to Quash Subpoena Served on Purdue University and Memorandum of Authorities by Defendant Doe 26. (Modesitt, Raymond)
July 8, 2011 Filing 4 MOTION to Quash Subpoena Served on Purdue University and Memorandum of Authorities by Defendant Doe 26. (Modesitt, Raymond)
July 7, 2011 Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Raymond H Modesitt on behalf of Doe 26 (csi)
July 7, 2011 Filing 1 MOTION to Quash Subpoena by Defendant Doe 26. (csi)

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 Indiana Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Third Degree Films Inc v. Does 1-2010
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Third Degree Films Inc
Represented By: Ira M Siegel PHV
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: Does 1-2010
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: Doe 26
Represented By: Raymond H Modesitt
Represented By: Tracie J Renfroe PHV
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?