Sulzer Mixpac AG v. Kettenbach GMBH and CO KG et al
| Sulzer Mixpac AG |
| Kettenbach GmbH and Co. KG, Kettenbach LP, Xinial Systems GmbH and Co. KG and Kettenbach GMBH and CO KG |
| 2:2021cv06613 |
| November 26, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Gary R Brown |
| Steven I Locke |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 3, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
ORDER: The Plaintiff's proposed schedule is hereby So Ordered, except that Defendant is directed to file their answer by January 25, 2022. Ordered by Judge Gary R. Brown on 1/22/2022. c/ecf (Tahbaz, Joseph)
|
|
Filing 19
STATUS REPORT to the Honorable Gary R. Brown, U.S.D.J. re: dispute as to proposed schedule for Markman hearing/briefing and deadline to answer Complaint by Kettenbach LP (Deni, Wiliam)
|
|
Filing 18
NOTICE of Appearance by Joseph Arand on behalf of Sulzer Mixpac AG (aty to be noticed) (Arand, Joseph)
|
|
Filing 17
NOTICE of Appearance by Suzanne Konrad on behalf of Sulzer Mixpac AG (aty to be noticed) (Konrad, Suzanne)
|
|
Filing 16
NOTICE of Appearance by Daniel In Hwang on behalf of Sulzer Mixpac AG (aty to be noticed) (Hwang, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 15
NOTICE of Appearance by Michael T Murphy, I on behalf of Sulzer Mixpac AG (aty to be noticed) (Murphy, Michael)
|
|
Electronic ORDER granting DE #10 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The attorney shall register for ECF, registration is available online at www.pacer.gov. Once registered, the attorney shall file a notice of appearance and ensure that she/he receives electronic notification of activity in this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 1/6/2022. (Pincsak, Lydia)
|
|
Electronic ORDER granting DE #12 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The attorney shall register for ECF, registration is available online at www.pacer.gov. Once registered, the attorney shall file a notice of appearance and ensure that she/he receives electronic notification of activity in this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 1/6/2022. (Pincsak, Lydia)
|
|
Electronic ORDER granting DE #11 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The attorney shall register for ECF, registration is available online at www.pacer.gov. Once registered, the attorney shall file a notice of appearance and ensure that she/he receives electronic notification of activity in this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 1/6/2022. (Pincsak, Lydia)
|
|
Electronic ORDER granting DE #13 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The attorney shall register for ECF, registration is available online at www.pacer.gov. Once registered, the attorney shall file a notice of appearance and ensure that she/he receives electronic notification of activity in this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke on 1/6/2022. (Pincsak, Lydia)
|
|
ORDER denying #8 Motion for Pre Motion Conference. Upon the examination of the filings, it appears that the proposed motion to dismiss may well be dependent upon Markman determinations. See Nalco Co. v. Chem-Mod, LLC, 883 F.3d 1337, 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2018). As such, the parties are directed to meet and confer and submit a joint proposed schedule for a Markman hearing and briefing. Ordered by Judge Gary R. Brown on 1/3/2022. c/ecf (Tahbaz, Joseph)
|
|
Filing 14
RESPONSE in Opposition re #8 Letter MOTION for pre motion conference (Letter from Michael T. Murphy, attorney for Sulzer Mixpac AG), filed by Sulzer Mixpac AG. (Cole, Charles)
|
|
Filing 13
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Suzanne Konrad Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-15138524. by Sulzer Mixpac AG. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Suzanne Konrad, #2 Proposed Order) (Cole, Charles)
|
|
Filing 12
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Michael T. Murphy Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-15138459. by Sulzer Mixpac AG. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michael T. Murphy, #2 Proposed Order) (Cole, Charles)
|
|
Filing 11
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Daniel Hwang Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-15138430. by Sulzer Mixpac AG. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Daniel Hwang, #2 Proposed Order) (Cole, Charles)
|
|
Filing 10
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice of Joseph F. Arand Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-15138339. by Sulzer Mixpac AG. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Joseph F. Arand, #2 Proposed Order) (Cole, Charles)
|
|
Filing 9
NOTICE of Appearance by Jonathon Brugh Lower on behalf of Kettenbach LP (aty to be noticed) (Lower, Jonathon)
|
|
Filing 8
Letter MOTION for pre motion conference by Kettenbach LP. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2) (Deni, Wiliam)
|
|
Filing 7
Notice of Report on the filing of an action regarding a Trademark. (Attachments: #1 Complaint Attachment) (Landow, Concetta)
|
|
Filing 6
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Sulzer Mixpac AG. Kettenbach LP served on 11/30/2021, answer due 12/21/2021. (Cole, Charles)
|
|
Filing 5
Summons Issued as to All Defendants. (Attachments: #1 Summons #2, #2 Summons #3) (Landow, Concetta)
|
|
Filing 4
Notice of Report on the filing of an action regarding a Patent. (Attachments: #1 Complaint) (Landow, Concetta)
|
|
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. (Landow, Concetta)
|
|
Filing 2
This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made. (Landow, Concetta) (Main Document 2 replaced on 11/29/2021) (Landow, Concetta).
|
|
Case Assigned to Judge Gary R. Brown and Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke. 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. (Landow, Concetta)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Kettenbach GmbH and Co. KG, Kettenbach LP, Xinial Systems GmbH and Co. KG filing fee $ 402, receipt number ANYEDC-15063475 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -YES,, filed by Sulzer Mixpac AG. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons, #3 Proposed Summons, #4 Proposed Summons, #5 Exhibit A (Trademark Registration), #6 Exhibit B ('578 Patent), #7 Exhibit C (Claim Chart), #8 Exhibit D (Mixpac System), #9 Exhibit E (2021 Awards), #10 Exhibit F (2014-2020 Awards), #11 Exhibit G (Mixpac T-Mixer DA), #12 Exhibit H (Futar DA), #13 Exhibit I (Bait and Switch--Mixpac Shown), #14 Exhibit J (Bait and Switch--New Shown), #15 Exhibit K (Identium), #16 Exhibit L (Futar), #17 Exhibit M (Silginat), #18 Exhibit N (Panasil), #19 Exhibit O (X Branding), #20 Exhibit P (X Branding at Tradeshows), #21 Exhibit Q (Nonasserted Trademark Registrations), #22 Exhibit R (Facebook Ad), #23 Exhibit S (Kettenbach Advertising), #24 Exhibit T (Instrgram Ad), #25 Exhibit U (Identium--So Unmistakable)) (Cole, Charles)
|
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.
