Xiao Wei Yang Catering Linkage In Inner Mongolia Co., Ltd.et al v. Inner Mongolia Xiao Wei Yang USA, Inc. et al
| Xiao Wei Yang Catering Linkage In Inner Mongolia Co., Ltd. and Fei Xie |
| Inner Mongolia Xiao Wei Yang USA, Inc., Cheng Xu and Yonghua Qin |
| 1:2015cv10114 |
| January 16, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Boston Office |
| Suffolk |
| Denise J. Casper |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 44 |
| 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
191
Judge Denise J. Casper: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The Court ALLOWS Defendants' motion for summary judgment with respect to Counts V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX and DENIES the motion as Counterclaims I, II, III, IV, V and VI. The Court D ENIES Defendants' request for attorney fees, D. 180, without prejudice to renew where Defendants, although they are the prevailing party on Plaintiffs' claims, have not yet sufficiently explained in terms of addressing the non-exclusive fac tors under Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 572, U.S. 545, 134 S. Ct. 1749, 1756 n.6 (2014) (citing factors of frivolousness, motivation, objective unreasonableness and the need to advance considerations of compensation and deterrence), see Scholz v. Goudreau, 901 F.3d 37 (1st Cir. 2018), that this is an "exceptional case" under 15 U.S.C. 1117(a) to warrant the award of reasonable attorneys' fees. Defendants have leave to do so in a supple mental filing, not to exceed ten pages by October 4, 2018. Also, by such time, October 4, 2018, Defendants shall file notice about whether they intend to continue to press their counterclaims in light of today's ruling and, if they do, what schedule they propose for doing so. Plaintiffs may respond, in no more than ten (10) pages to such filings by October 18, 2018.(Hourihan, Lisa)
|
|
Filing
153
Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley: ORDER entered. "For the above reasons, defendants' motion to deem requests for admission, # 140 , is ALLOWED. The court will schedule a hearing regarding whether plaintiffs should be sanctioned." Please see attached order. (Moore, Kellyann)
|
|
Filing
147
Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley: ORDER entered granting 129 Motion for Sanctions. " For the above reasons, defendants' motion for sanctions, # 129 , is ALLOWED and attorneys' fees and costs shall be paid by plaintiffs. Defendants shall submit records pertaining to such fees by April 20, 2018. Plaintiffs may object to the reasonableness of the fees no later than May 4, 2018." (Moore, Kellyann)
|
|
Filing
81
Judge Denise J. Casper: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The Court ALLOWS Defendants' motion and Counts I, II, III and IV are hereby DISMISSED. D. 63; D. 73.(Hourihan, Lisa)
|
|
Filing
26
Judge Denise J. Casper: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - the Court DENIES without prejudice Defendants' motion to dismiss as to counts I, II, III and IV. The Court permits a sixty-day period, until February 14, 2016, of limited jurisdicti onal discovery to resolve whether the corporation contemplated by Paragraph 2 of the Cooperation Agreement was formed and registered. The Defendants then have until February 28, 2016 to renew any motion to dismiss on this ground. The Court DENIES with prejudice Defendants' motion to dismiss as to counts V, VI, VII, VIII and IX as they are raised by Xiao Wei Yang Catering-China. The Court ALLOWS Defendants' motion to dismiss as to counts V, VI, VII, VIII and IX as they are raised by Xie. (Hourihan, Lisa)
|
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 Massachusetts 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
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.
