Clark v. Impremedia Operating Company, LLC
| Dennis Clark |
| Impremedia Operating Company, LLC |
| 1:2019cv05103 |
| September 8, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Peggy Kuo |
| Eric N Vitaliano |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 Copyright Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 4, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
SCHEDULING ORDER: An Initial Conference will be held in this case on December 5, 2019 at 11:00 a.m. before Peggy Kuo, United States Magistrate Judge, in Courtroom 11C South of the United States Courthouse, 225 Cadman Plaza East, Brooklyn, New York. All counsel are required to attend. Counsel are directed to the annexed Initial Conference Order for instructions. At least five days before the Conference, the parties must file a completed copy of the Proposed Discovery Plan, a PDF version of which may be found at: https://www.nyed.uscourts.gov/pub/PK-discovplan.pdf. Any request for adjournment of this or any other conference must be made in writing on notice to opposing parties, and must disclose whether or not all parties consent. No request for adjournment will be considered unless made at least two (2) business days before the scheduled conference, except in the event of an emergency. Counsel with knowledge and authority must be present. Per diem counsel may not appear without prior permission of the Court. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo on 11/4/2019. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Discovery Plan) (Riquelme, Claudia)
|
| Filing 8 Letter MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint, by Impremedia Operating Company, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A (Stipulation Extending Time)) (Harrington, Kevin) |
|
ORDER granting #8 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. The deadline for defendant Impremedia Operating Company, LLC to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint is extended to November 18, 2019. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo on 11/1/2019. (Riquelme, Claudia)
|
|
ORDER granting #7 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. The deadline for defendant Impremedia Operating Company, LLC to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint is extended to November 4, 2019. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo on 10/2/2019. (Riquelme, Claudia)
|
| Filing 7 Letter MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint, by Impremedia Operating Company, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A (Stipulation Extending Time)) (Harrington, Kevin) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Kevin J. Harrington on behalf of Impremedia Operating Company, LLC (aty to be noticed) (Harrington, Kevin) |
| Filing 5 Notice of Report on the Filing or Determination of an Action or appeal Regarding a Copyright. (Attachments: #1 complaint) (Rocco, Christine) |
| Filing 4 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 3 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Impremedia Operating Company, LLC. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Case assigned to Judge Eric N. Vitaliano and Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Impremedia Operating Company, LLC filing fee $ 400, receipt number ANYEDC-11826631 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -Yes,, filed by Dennis Clark. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Proposed Summons, #5 Civil Cover Sheet, #6 Copyright Form) (Liebowitz, Richard) |
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 New York 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: Clark v. Impremedia Operating Company, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Impremedia Operating Company, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Kevin J. Harrington |
| 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: Dennis Clark | |
| Represented By: | Richard Liebowitz |
| 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.
