Gioconda Law Group PLLC v. Kenzie

Plaintiff: Gioconda Law Group PLLC
Defendant: Arthur Wesley Kenzie
Case Number: 1:2012cv04919
Filed: June 22, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: New York
Presiding Judge: J. Paul Oetken
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 15:1114
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
May 31, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 56 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 40 Motion to Appoint Rule 706 Experts. The plaintiff, Gioconda Law Group PLLC (GLG), commenced this action against Arthur Wesley Kenzie (Kenzie), who is proceeding pro se, asserting claims for federal cybersquatting, tr ademark infringement, false designation of origin and unlawful interception and disclosure of electronic communications... and for related New York State law claims. Before the Court is Kenzies motion, made pursuant to Rule 706 of the Federal Rules o f Evidence, for the Court to: (a) appoint an independent expert witness to assist in assessing the evidence with regards to (1) the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP); (2) alleged violations of The Wiretap Act; (3) alleged violation s of the Lanham Act; (4) alleged violations of the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act; (5) a trade-mark fair use defense in the intersecting contexts of information/network/cyber security and cybersquatting; [and] (6) proposed extensions to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act; and (b) [apportion] all costs of such experts to the plaintiff. The plaintiff opposes the motion. For the foregoing reasons, the defendant's motion for the Court to appoint an expert witness(es), pursuant to Rule 706 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Docket Entry No. 40, is denied. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox on 5/31/2013) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (rsh).
April 23, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 47 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: denying 26 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at Dkt. No. 26. SO ORDERED.(Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 4/23/2013) (ama)

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: Gioconda Law Group PLLC v. Kenzie
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Gioconda Law Group PLLC
Represented By: Joseph Christopher Gioconda
Represented By: Kristin Lia
Represented By: Jonathan Albert Malki
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Arthur Wesley Kenzie
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 [ 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?