Ficep Corporation v. Voortman USA Corp

Plaintiff: Ficep Corporation
Defendant: Voortman USA Corp
Case Number: 1:2013cv00429
Filed: February 7, 2013
Court: Maryland District Court
Office: Baltimore Office
County: Harford
Presiding Judge: William D Quarles
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
March 24, 2015 70 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge William D Quarles, Jr on 3/24/2015. (ca2s, Deputy Clerk)
July 16, 2014 56 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge William D Quarles, Jr on 7/15/14. (apls, Deputy Clerk)

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 Maryland District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ficep Corporation v. Voortman USA Corp
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ficep Corporation
Represented By: Lisa S Mankofsky
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Voortman USA Corp
Represented By: Robert Scott Brennen
Represented By: Dargaye H Churnet
Represented By: Erinn M Maguire
Represented By: Erik Stephan Maurer
Represented By: Christopher James Renk
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 [ 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?