Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. v. Rolex Deli Corp. et al Featured Case
Plaintiff: Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.
Defendant: Rolex Deli Corp. and Ali Mohamad
Case Number: 1:2011cv09321
Filed: December 20, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: New York
Presiding Judge: Barbara S. Jones
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1051
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2011. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 20, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 3 STANDING ORDER IN RE PILOT PROJECT REGARDING CASE MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES FOR COMPLEX CIVIL CASES IN THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK (See M-10-468 Order filed November 1, 2011). This case is hereby designated for inclusion in the Pilot Project Regarding Case Management Techniques for Complex Civil Cases in the Southern District of New York (the Pilot Project), unless the judge to whom this case is assigned determines otherwise. This case is designated for inclusion in the Pilot Project because it is a class action, an MDL action, or is in one of the following Nature of Suit categories: 160, 245, 315, 355, 365, 385, 410, 830, 840, 850, 893, or 950. The presiding judge in a case that does not otherwise qualify for inclusion in the Pilot Project may nevertheless designate the case for inclusion in the Pilot Project by issuing an order directing that the case be included in the Pilot Project. The description of the Pilot Project, including procedures to be followed, is attached to this Order. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 10/31/2011) (ft)
December 20, 2011 Mailed notice to Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks to report the filing of this action. (ft)
December 20, 2011 Filing 2 RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. Identifying Corporate Parent Rolex Industries, Inc. for Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. Document filed by Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.(ft)
December 20, 2011 Case Designated ECF. (ft)
December 20, 2011 Magistrate Judge James L. Cott is so designated. (ft)
December 20, 2011 SUMMONS ISSUED as to Ali Mohamad, Rolex Deli Corp. (ft)
December 20, 2011 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Ali Mohamad, Rolex Deli Corp. (Filing Fee $ 350.00, Receipt Number 465401024882)Document filed by Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(ft)

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

Search for this case: Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. v. Rolex Deli Corp. 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: Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.
Represented By: Brian William Brokate
Represented By: Jeffrey Evan Dupler
Represented By: Beth M Frenchman
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: Rolex Deli Corp.
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: Ali Mohamad
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?