ProDox, LLC v. Professional Document Services, Inc.
| ProDox, LLC |
| Professional Document Services, Inc. doing business as ProDoc-Kytel |
| 2:2020cv02035 |
| November 4, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Jennifer A Dorsey |
| Andrew P Gordon |
| Nancy J Koppe |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1125 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 26, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties by Professional Document Services, Inc.. There are no known interested parties other than those participating in the case (Mariam, Craig)
|
|
Filing 12
ANSWER to #1 Complaint, with Jury Demand filed by Professional Document Services, Inc.. Discovery Plan/Scheduling Order due by 2/11/2021.(Mariam, Craig) NOTICE of Certificate of Interested Parties requirement: Under Local Rule 7.1-1, a party must immediately file its disclosure statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court.
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER Granting #8 Verified Petition for Permission to Practice Pro Hac Vice for Attorney Lance C. Venable for ProDox, LLC and approving Designation of Local Counsel F. Christopher Austin. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 12/2/2020. Any Attorney not yet registered with the Court's CM/ECF System shall submit a Registration Form on the Court's website #www.nvd.uscourts.gov (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
|
|
Filing 10
SUMMONS Returned Executed by ProDox, LLC. Professional Document Services, Inc. served on 11/6/2020. (Austin, F.)
|
|
Filing 9
CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties by ProDox, LLC. There are no known interested parties other than those participating in the case (Austin, F.)
|
|
Filing 8
MOTION/VERIFIED PETITION for Permission to Practice Pro Hac Vice by Lance C. Venable and DESIGNATION of Local Counsel F. Christopher Austin (Filing fee $ 250 receipt number 0978-6253991) by Plaintiff ProDox, LLC. (Austin, F.)
|
|
Filing 7
CLERK'S NOTICE that this case is randomly reassigned to Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey for all further proceedings. All further documents must bear the correct case number 2:20-cv-02035-JAD-NJK. (no image attached) (MMM)
|
|
Filing 6
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 11/5/2020. With good cause appearing, the Honorable Judge Andrew P. Gordon recuses himself in this action. IT IS ORDERED that this action is referred to the Clerk for random reassignment of this case for all further proceedings. (no image attached) (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KSR)
|
|
Filing 5
STANDING ORDER. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Andrew P. Gordon. Judge Gordon's Chambers Practices, which are posted on the U.S. District Court, District of Nevada public website, may also be accessed directly via this hyperlink: #www.nvd.uscourts.gov. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
|
|
Filing 4
NOTICE TO COUNSEL PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE IA 11-2. Counsel Lance C Venable to comply with completion and filing of the Verified Petition and Designation of Local Counsel. For your convenience, click on the following link to obtain the form from the Court's website - #www.nvd.uscourts.gov. Upon approval of the Verified Petition, counsel is required to register for the Court's Case Management and Electronic Case Filing (CM/ECF) system and the electronic service of documents. Please visit the Court's website www.nvd.uscourts.gov to register Attorney. Verified Petition due by 11/18/2020. (no image attached) (MR)
|
|
Filing 3
Summons Issued as to Professional Document Services, Inc. re #1 Complaint. (MR)
|
|
Filing 2
AO 120 - REPORT on the filing or determination of an action regarding a patent or trademark. E-mailed to the US Patent and Trademark Office. (Attachments: #1 Complaint) (MR)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Professional Document Services, Inc. (Filing fee $400 receipt number 0978-6242685) by ProDox, LLC. Proof of service due by 2/2/2021. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons, #3 Exhibit) (Austin, F.) NOTICE of Certificate of Interested Parties requirement: Under Local Rule 7.1-1, a party must immediately file its disclosure statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court.
|
|
Case randomly assigned to Judge Andrew P. Gordon and Magistrate Judge Nancy J. Koppe. (MR)
|
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 Nevada 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: ProDox, LLC v. Professional Document Services, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Professional Document Services, Inc. doing business as ProDoc-Kytel | |
| Represented By: | Craig J. Mariam |
| 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: ProDox, LLC | |
| Represented By: | F. Christopher Austin |
| Represented By: | Lance C. Venable |
| 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.
