Xiao Wei Yang Catering Linkage In Inner Mongolia Co., Ltd.et al v. Inner Mongolia Xiao Wei Yang USA, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Xiao Wei Yang Catering Linkage In Inner Mongolia Co., Ltd. and Fei Xie
Defendant: Inner Mongolia Xiao Wei Yang USA, Inc., Cheng Xu and Yonghua Qin
Case Number: 1:2015cv10114
Filed: January 16, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Boston Office
County: Suffolk
Presiding Judge: Denise J. Casper
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:44
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
September 20, 2018 Opinion or Order 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)
April 9, 2018 Opinion or Order 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)
March 30, 2018 Opinion or Order 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)
February 6, 2017 Opinion or Order 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)
December 14, 2015 Opinion or Order 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)
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 Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Xiao Wei Yang Catering Linkage In Inner Mongolia Co., Ltd.et al v. Inner Mongolia Xiao Wei Yang USA, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Xiao Wei Yang Catering Linkage In Inner Mongolia Co., Ltd.
Represented By: Michael A. Albert
Represented By: Hunter D. Keeton
Represented By: Frank Xu
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: Fei Xie
Represented By: Michael A. Albert
Represented By: Hunter D. Keeton
Represented By: Frank Xu
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: Inner Mongolia Xiao Wei Yang USA, 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 ]
Defendant: Cheng Xu
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: Yonghua Qin
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?