Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC et al v. Allen et al
Plaintiff: Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC and Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC
Defendant: Michael Allen and Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc.
Case Number: 5:2024cv00239
Filed: February 16, 2024
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Therese Wiley Dancks
Referring Judge: Glenn T Suddaby
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1121 Trademark Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 15, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 15, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 21 TEXT ORDER: Court reviewed status report/letter request (Dkt. No. #19 ) regarding the parties' stipulation on the preliminary injunction motion and the request to adjourn the Rule 16 conference while the parties explore settlement. The District Court addressed the parties' stipulation on preliminary relief (Dkt. No. #20 ), and the Court grants the request to adjourn the Rule 16 conference for the reasons stated. The Rule 16 conference is adjourned without new date at this time. The Court will promptly reschedule it if the parties are unable to reach a settlement. Plaintiff is directed to file a status report on settlement or a notice of dismissal if appropriate by 6/3/2024. SO ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks on 4/15/2024. (sg )
April 12, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ORDER approving #18 Stipulation to withdraw Plaintiffs' #2 & #7 motion for preliminary injunction and the hearing scheduled for May 7, 2024 is cancelled. Both Defendant Michael Allen and Defendant Pinnacle Employee Services Inc. acknowledge and admit to receiving good and sufficient service of process of the Summons and Complaint, and the Parties agree that the Defendants Answer to the Complaint shall be due on or before June 1, 2024. Signed by U.S. District Judge Glenn T Suddaby on 4/12/2024. (Copy served upon Defendant Allen by regular mail) (sal )
April 12, 2024 Filing 19 Letter Motion from James P. Youngs for Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC requesting Court "So Order" the stipulation, mark Plaintiff's motion off the calendar and adjourn Rule 16 Conference to July 1st or later. submitted to Judge Suddaby . (Youngs, James)
April 12, 2024 ***Answer due date updated for Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc. answer due 6/1/2024. (sal )
April 10, 2024 Filing 18 STIPULATION re #2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC. Motion returnable before Judge Glenn T. Suddaby by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC submitted to Judge Suddaby. (Youngs, James)
April 10, 2024 Filing 17 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC re #2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC. Motion returnable before Judge Glenn T. Suddaby COS re: digital exhibits (Youngs, James)
April 8, 2024 Filing 16 DOCKET ANNOTATION: CD: Syracuse Clerks Office received a CD containing digital media - Exhibits B and L to the #2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction. Not available for public viewing. (Cover letter and mailing envelope attached). (kck)
April 8, 2024 TEXT NOTICE OF FILING DEFICIENCY as to Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC regarding the #16 Docket Annotation NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of the following Filing Deficiency: Missing certificate of service of digital exhibits upon Pro Se Defendant, please file a certificate of service as to service upon Pro Se Defendant. The correction should be made within 3 days of this notice. Notice of Filing Deficiency Deadline 4/11/2024 (kck)
April 4, 2024 Filing 15 TEXT ORDER granting Plaintiffs' #14 letter-motion requesting an adjournment of the hearing date for Plaintiffs' #2 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. The hearing on Plaintiffs' #2 motion set for April 24, 2024 is RESCHEDULED for MAY 7, 2024 at 10:00 AM in Syracuse, NY before the undersigned. As stated in the Court's Text Order of 02/20/2024, the day before the hearing, each party must file a letter advising the Court of the extent to which, at the hearing, it intends to adduce evidence through live witness testimony and exhibits or intends to offer only oral argument (in which case it would rely on the declarations and exhibits adduced in the parties motion papers). SO ORDERED by U.S. District Judge Glenn T Suddaby on 4/4/2024. (Copy served upon Defendant Allen via regular mail) (sal)
April 3, 2024 Filing 14 Letter Motion from James P. Youngs for Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC requesting Adjournment of hearing date submitted to Judge Glenn T. Suddaby . (Youngs, James)
April 2, 2024 Filing 13 TEXT ORDER liberally construing #11 Defendant Michael Allen's filing of 03/14/2024 as a pre-Answer motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), instead of as an Answer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and accompanying motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c), and denying without prejudice that motion to dismiss as both procedurally improper (lacking a memorandum of law under Local Rule 7.1 and relying on record evidence that is neither incorporated by reference in, nor integral to, the Complaint) and unsupported by a showing of cause. To the extent that #11 Defendant Michael Allen's filing of 03/14/2024 also contains a request for an additional "30 days from receipt of my letter to the court" in which to "file a proper response" to the Complaint, that request is DENIED as unsupported by a showing of cause. Also DENIED for the same reason is #12 Defendant Michael Allen's letter-motion for "an additional 60 days to find legal representation for myself and Pinnacle Employee Services": Plaintiffs' motion is an emergency one, and Defendant Michael Allen has failed to adduce evidence warranting such a long extension, or to even specify what deadline he is requesting an extension of. (The Court adds that Defendant Michael Allen cannot file motions on behalf of other parties.) Defendant Michael Allen's Answer remains due pursuant to the deadline imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Finally, the deadline for Defendants response(s) to Plaintiffs' motion (which was inadvertently tied by the Court, in its Text Order of 02/20/2024, to the filing of a Certificate of Service instead of the date of such service) is clarified as follows: Defendants' response to Plaintiffs' motion is due by the end of FRIDAY, APRIL 12, 2024; and Plaintiffs' reply to that response is due by the end of FRIDAY, APRIL 19, 2024. The parties are advised to ignore the automatically generated deadlines stated on the docket sheet in Dkt. No. 7 (and the Clerk's Office is directed to remove the gavel from that docket entry). A hearing on Plaintiffs' motion is scheduled for APRIL 24, 2024, at 10:00 AM before the undersigned in Syracuse, New York. As stated in the Court's Text Order of 02/20/2024, the day before the hearing, each party must file a letter advising the Court of the extent to which, at the hearing, it intends to adduce evidence through live witness testimony and exhibits or intends to offer only oral argument (in which case it would rely on the declarations and exhibits adduced in the parties motion papers). SO ORDERED by U.S. District Judge Glenn T Suddaby on 4/2/2024. (Copy served upon Defendant Allen via regular mail) (sal)
April 2, 2024 Filing 12 Letter Motion from Michael Allen on behalf of Pinnacle Employee Services requesting a 60 day extension of time to obtain counsel. [Filed via MFT on 4/2/2024.] (hmr)
March 26, 2024 ***Answer due date updated for Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc. answer due 4/3/2024. (hmr)
March 26, 2024 CLERK'S CORRECTION OF DOCKET ENTRY re #10 Affidavit of Service: Clerk added "as Agent for Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc. and changed 3/12/2024 to 3/13/2024 on this docket entry. (hmr)
March 22, 2024 Filing 10 AFFIDAVIT of Service for ECF #1-8 Including Summons and Complaint and all papers in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction served on Samuel K. Swenson, Esq. as Agent for Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc. on 3/13/2024, filed by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC. (Youngs, James) Modified on 3/26/2024 (hmr).
March 14, 2024 Filing 11 ANSWER to #1 Complaint by Michael Allen. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3 Part 1, #4 Exhibit 3 Part 2, #5 Exhibit 4, #6 Exhibit 5, #7 Envelope)(hmr)
February 26, 2024 Filing 9 AFFIDAVIT re #8 FRCP 7.1 Corporate Disclosure Statement STATEMENT OF CITIZENSHIP OF LLC by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC. (Youngs, James)
February 26, 2024 Filing 8 FRCP 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC identifying Other Affiliate FKAPI, Inc. for Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC.. (Youngs, James)
February 26, 2024 Filing 7 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC. Motion returnable before Judge Glenn T. Suddaby Response to Motion due by 3/18/2024. Reply to Response to Motion due by 3/25/2024 (Youngs, James)
February 20, 2024 Filing 6 TEXT ORDER denying #2 Plaintiffs' application for an Order to Show Cause under Local Rule 65.1 and 7.1(e), and reserving decision on #2 Plaintiffs' motion for a Preliminary Injunction pending the completion of briefing on that motion. Plaintiffs' application for an Order to Show Cause is unsupported by an affidavit clearly and specifically showing good and sufficient cause why the standard Notice of Motion procedure (i.e., advanced notice, 21 days for an opposition, and 7 days for a reply) cannot be used with regard to the underlying motion for a Preliminary Injunction, as required by Local Rule 7.1(e). (Dkt. No. #2 , Attach. 20, at 8-10 [Youngs Decl.]; see generally Dkt. No. #2 , Attach. 2 [Conklin Decl.].) In addition, Plaintiffs' application for an Order to Show Cause is unsupported by a detailed and specific affidavit demonstrating good cause why they cannot give reasonable advanced notice of the application for an Order to Show Cause to Defendants, and substantial prejudice that would result from the requirement of such reasonable advanced notice, as also required by Local Rule 7.1(e). (Id.) As a result, Plaintiffs are promptly directed to serve Defendants with a copy of their Complaint, motion papers and this Text Order. Defendants' response papers are due within 21 days of Plaintiffs' filing of a Certificate of Service; and Plaintiffs' reply papers are due within 7 days after the filing of Defendants' response papers. In the coming days, the Court shall schedule a hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for a Preliminary Injunction. The day before the hearing, each party must file a letter advising the Court of the extent to which, at the hearing, it intends to adduce evidence through live witness testimony and exhibits or intends to offer only oral argument (in which case it would rely on the declarations and exhibits adduced in the partys motion papers). Finally, three precautionary statements are warranted. First, Plaintiffs are respectfully reminded of their duty to file a sworn statement of the citizenship of each member of each LLC named as a Plaintiff. See 250 Lake Ave. Assocs., LLC v. Erie Ins. Co., 281 F. Supp. 3d 335, 341 (W.D.N.Y. 2017); Arabesque v. Capacity LLC, 07-CV-2042, 2008 WL 681459, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2008); Linium, LLC v. Bernhoit, 17-CV-0200, 2017 WL 2599944, at *3 (N.D.N.Y. June 15, 2017) (Kahn, J.). Second, Defendants are respectfully advised that, if Plaintiffs ultimately prevail on their claims in this action, Defendants will be responsible for (among other things) paying damages caused by any derogatory, defamatory and/or false representations made by them regarding Plaintiffs' respective trademark rights after, and/or resulting from, the entry of this Text Order. Third, Defendant Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc., is respectfully advised that it must appear through counsel in this action or risk having a default judgment entered against it. SO ORDERED by U.S. District Judge Glenn T Suddaby on 2/20/2024. (sal)
February 20, 2024 Filing 5 Report on the Filing and Determination of an Action regarding trademark number 6,696,685. (mmg).
February 20, 2024 Filing 4 G.O. 25 FILING ORDER ISSUED: Initial Telephone Conference set for 5/20/2024 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks. Civil Case Management Plan must be filed and Mandatory Disclosures are to be exchanged by the parties on or before 5/13/2024. (Pursuant to Local Rule 26.2, mandatory disclosures are to be exchanged among the parties but are NOT to be filed with the Court.) (mmg).
February 20, 2024 Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Michael Allen, Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Summons Issued as to Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc.)(mmg).
February 16, 2024 Filing 2 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC, Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC. Motion returnable before Judge Glenn T. Suddaby. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Law, #2 Declaration of Elizabeth Conklin, #3 Exhibit A, #4 Exhibit B, #5 Exhibit C, #6 Exhibit D, #7 Exhibit E, #8 Exhibit F, #9 Exhibit G, #10 Exhibit H, #11 Exhibit I, #12 Exhibit J, #13 Exhibit K, #14 Exhibit L, #15 Exhibit M, #16 Exhibit N, #17 Exhibit O, #18 Exhibit P, #19 Exhibit Q, #20 Declaration of James P. Youngs in support of motion for preliminary injunction, #21 Exhibit A)(mmg).
February 16, 2024 Filing 1 COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND against Michael Allen, Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc. (Filing fee $405 receipt number ANYNDC-6622861) filed by Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC, Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - '685 Reg. Cert, #2 Exhibit B - PES Inc. Cease and Desist dated Apr.21, 2022, #3 Exhibit C - PES Inc. E.D.Cal. Complaint,, #4 PES Inc. E.D. Cal. Amended Complaint, #5 Exhibit E - E.D. Cal Dismissal Order, #6 Exhibit F - JPY C&D Letter dated 2/8/24, #7 Exhibit G - 2/9/24 Allen Email, #8 Exhibit H - '685 Registration File History, #9 Civil Cover Sheet)(mmg).

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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC et al v. Allen et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Pinnacle Holding Company, LLC
Represented By: Amanda C. Nardozza
Represented By: James P. Youngs
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: Pinnacle Employee Services, LLC
Represented By: Amanda C. Nardozza
Represented By: James P. Youngs
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 ]
Defendant: Michael Allen
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 ]
Defendant: Pinnacle Employee Services, Inc.
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.


Why Is My Information Online?