Nola Spice Designs, LLC v. Haydel Enterprises, Inc.
| Nola Spice Designs, LLC |
| Haydel Enterprises, Inc. |
| 2:2012cv02515 |
| October 16, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana |
| New Orleans Office |
| Orleans |
| Carl Barbier |
| Joseph C. Wilkinson |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1051 Trademark Infringement |
| Defendant |
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
138
ORDER & REASONS: denying 134 Motion to Stay Execution of Judgment Without Supersedeas Bond and, in the Alternative, to Reduce Amount of Supersedeas Bond (Rec. Doc. 134 ) is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that, if Haydel wishes to stay the enforcement of this judgment, it must post a supersedeas bond in the amount of the judgment plus twenty (20) per cent, which amounts to $37,205.58, within ten (10) days of this order. Signed by Judge Carl Barbier on 11/20/13. (sek, )
|
|
Filing
122
ORDERED that Nola Spice Design, LLC's 114 Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Carl Barbier. (gec, )
|
|
Filing
105
ORDER & REASONS: ORDERED THAT Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Nola Spice, LLC and Third Party Defendant Raquel Duarte's Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 60 ) is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. FURTHER ORDERED that a declaratory jud gment stating that Nola Spice Designs, LLC is not infringing on the trademarks of Haydel Enterprises d/b/a/ Haydel's Bakery be entered. FURTHER ORDERED that Nola Spice Design, LLC's claims under the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act, La. R.S. 51:1405 et seq., be DISMISSED with prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Haydel Enterprises' Motion for Summary Judgment (Rec. Doc. 85 ) is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that Haydel Enterprises' counterclaims against Nol a Spice Designs, LLC and Raquel Duarte for copyright infringement in violation of 17 U.S.C 106, false designation of origin in violation of the Lanham Act, trademark infringement in violation of the Lanham Act, trademark dilution in violation of the Lanham Act and Louisiana's Anti-Dilution Act, and unfair trade practices under LUTPA be DISMISSED with prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that Haydel Enterprise's Motion to Strike (Rec. Doc. 97 ) is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Carl Barbier on 8/28/13. (sek, )
|
|
Filing
102
ORDER & REASONS granting Nola Spice Designs, LLC and Raquel Duarte's 80 Motion in Limine. Signed by Judge Carl Barbier on 8/12/2013. (gbw, )
|
|
Filing
93
ORDER AND REASONS denying 73 MOTION to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Wilkinson, Jr on 8/2/2013.(blg)
|
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 Louisiana Eastern 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: Nola Spice Designs, LLC v. Haydel Enterprises, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Haydel Enterprises, Inc. | |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Nola Spice Designs, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Jason Paul Foote |
| 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.
