KNOWLEDGEAZ, INC. v. DEFOSSET et al
| 1:2005cv01019 |
| July 12, 2005 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| William T. Lawrence |
| Richard L. Young |
| Copyright |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1338 Copyright Infringement |
| 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
469
ENTRY ON ALL PENDING MOTIONS (see Entry). The court is requesting the Magistrate Judge schedule a conference to determine readiness for trial and to set a prompt trial date. Signed by Judge Richard L. Young on 2/19/2009. (PG)
|
|
Filing
435
ORDER granting 356 Guy Hensley's Renewed Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; denying 358 Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 359 Defendants Guy Hensley's and Jim Walter Resources Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 364 Defendants Dennis Seipel's and Action Authority's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Richard L. Young on 9/30/08. (TMD)
|
|
Filing
352
ORDER denying 215 Motion for default judgment damages. Signed by Judge Richard L. Young on 2/8/08. (CLL)
|
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 Southern 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: KNOWLEDGEAZ, INC. v. DEFOSSET et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
