On Site Energy Company, Inc. v. MTU Onsite Energy Corp.
||On Site Energy Company, Inc.
||MTU Onsite Energy Corp.
||April 14, 2010
||US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
||Central Islip Office
||William D. Wall
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||15 U.S.C. § 1121 Trademark Infringement
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|August 2, 2013
MEMORANDUM & ORDER re: 104 Plaintiff's motion for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, and/or to set aside the verdict is DENIED; re: 102 Defendant's motion for Attorney Fees is GRANTED IN PART, but the Court cannot make a determin ation as to amount. If Defendant intends to proceed on this issue, it must file a motion for attorneys' fees, supported by appropriate case law and the contemporaneous time records, within 30 days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff's opposition is due 14 days thereafter and Defendant's reply, if any, is due within 7 days of the opposition. Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 8/2/2013. (Nohs, Bonnie)
|July 19, 2012
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 44 Motion in Limine. Pending before the Court is MTU's motion to exclude two of OSE's experts: Robert Schlegel and Henry Ostberg. For the foregoing reasons, MTU's motion to exclude OSE's experts (Docket Entry 44) is DENIED in its entirety. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 7/19/2012. C/ECF (Valle, Christine)
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
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?