Liveperson, Inc. v. 24/7 Customer, Inc.
| Liveperson, Inc. |
| 24/7 Customer, Inc. |
| 1:2014cv01559 |
| March 6, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Robert W. Sweet |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
74
OPINION #105723: Upon the conclusions set forth above, the proposed Expert Disclosure, Source Code and Patent Prosecution Provisions as modified above are incorporated into the PPO. The parties shall meet and confer to generate a list of competitors to be used in conjunction with the Expert Disclosure Provision. Defendant's motion to compel is denied. The parties shall provide the Court with an updated PPO for its review, after meeting and conferring regarding the modifications as outlined above. The parties remain free to agree to, and jointly propose, language in place of that provided in this Opinion. It is so ordered. (As further set forth within this Order.) (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 7/29/2015) (ajs) Modified on 7/31/2015 (ca).
|
|
Filing
47
AMENDED OPINION: For the reasons set out above, Defendant's motion is granted in part and denied in part. With respect the claims and portions of claims held to be inadequately pled, Plaintiff may replead within twenty days of the date of this opinion. With respect to the Lanham Act claim, Plaintiff shall provide a more definite statement as outlined above within twenty days of the date of this opinion. It is so ordered. (See Opinion.) (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 1/15/2015) (ajs)
|
|
Filing
46
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re: 25 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, or, In the Alternative MOTION for More Definite Statement filed by 24/7 Customer, Inc. For the reasons set out above, Defendant's motion is granted in part and denied in part. With respect the claims and portions of claims held to be inadequately pled, Plaintiff may replead within twenty days of the date of this opinion. With respect to the Lanham Act claim, Plaintiff shall provide a more definite statement as outlined above within twenty days of the date of this opinion. It is so ordered. (See Opinion.) (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 1/9/2015) (ajs)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Liveperson, Inc. v. 24/7 Customer, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Liveperson, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Mark Stewart Cohen |
| Represented By: | J. Michael Huget |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Kierstead Lamb |
| Represented By: | Sandra C. McCallion |
| Represented By: | Roger P Meyers |
| 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: 24/7 Customer, 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.
