Briggs & Riley Travelware, LLC. v. Travel Caddy, Inc.
| Briggs & Riley Travelware, LLC. |
| Travel Caddy, Inc. d/b/a Travelon, Travel Caddy, Inc. and Travel Caddy, Inc. doing business as Travelon |
| 2:2018cv07290 |
| December 21, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Joan M Azrack |
| A Kathleen Tomlinson |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 25, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
ORDER granting DE #8 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Defendant Travel Caddy, Inc must answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint by February 22, 2019. Ordered by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 1/25/2019. (Degennaro, Christopher)
|
| Filing 8 Letter MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer, by Briggs & Riley Travelware, LLC. (Bernstein, Peter) Modified event type from Letter to Motion on 1/24/2019 (Ortiz, Grisel). |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Briggs & Riley Travelware, LLC.. Travel Caddy, Inc. served on 1/2/2019, answer due 1/23/2019. (Bernstein, Peter) |
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Travel Caddy, Inc.. (Ortiz, Grisel) |
| Filing 5 Proposed Summons. Re #1 Complaint, by Briggs & Riley Travelware, LLC. (Bernstein, Peter) |
| Filing 4 Notice of Report on the filing of an action regarding a Patent. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| 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. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| Filing 2 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| This is a patent case and is eligible for the Patent Pilot Project. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| Proposed summons is rejected; the section that reads "The answer or motion must be served on Plaintiff or Plaintiff's attorney, whose name and address are:" has not been completed; the Clerk's Office cannot issue the summons. Counsel is advised to submit a completed proposed summons using the event Proposed Summons/Civil Cover Sheet. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Joan M. Azrack and Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson. 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. (Rodin, Deanna) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement and Invalidity against Travel Caddy, Inc. d/b/a Travelon filing fee $ 400, receipt number ANYEDC-11048856 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -YES,, filed by Briggs & Riley Travelware, LLC.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Civil Cover Sheet, #7 Proposed Summons) (Bernstein, Peter) |
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
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.
