Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc.
Plaintiff: Cedar Lane Technologies Inc.
Defendant: Sirius XM Radio Inc.
Case Number: 1:2020cv03635
Filed: May 11, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 271
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS RSS Track this Docket
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 11, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 11, 2020 Filing 7 PROPOSED ORDER. Document filed by Cedar Lane Technologies Inc.. Related Document Number: #6 ..(Rabicoff, Isaac) Proposed Order to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.
May 11, 2020 Filing 6 MOTION for Isaac Rabicoff to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-19780662. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Cedar Lane Technologies Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Declaration, #2 Supplement Certificate of Good Standing).(Rabicoff, Isaac)
May 11, 2020 Filing 5 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Sirius XM Radio Inc, re: #1 Complaint,,. Document filed by Cedar Lane Technologies Inc...(Rabicoff, Isaac)
May 11, 2020 Filing 4 AO 120 FORM PATENT - NOTICE OF SUBMISSION BY ATTORNEY. AO 120 Form Patent/Trademark for case opening submitted to court for review..(Rabicoff, Isaac)
May 11, 2020 Filing 3 RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by Cedar Lane Technologies Inc...(Rabicoff, Isaac)
May 11, 2020 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Rabicoff, Isaac)
May 11, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Sirius XM Radio Inc.. (Filing Fee $ 400.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-19780501)Document filed by Cedar Lane Technologies Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10a, #11 Exhibit 10b, #12 Errata 11a, #13 Exhibit 11b, #14 Exhibit 11c, #15 Exhibit 12a, #16 Exhibit 12b, #17 Exhibit 12c, #18 Exhibit 13, #19 Exhibit 14, #20 Exhibit 16a, #21 Exhibit 16b).(Rabicoff, Isaac)
May 11, 2020 >>>NOTICE REGARDING DEFICIENT MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE. Notice to RE-FILE Document No. #6 MOTION for Isaac Rabicoff to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-19780662. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff... The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): expired Certificate of Good Standing from Illinois; missing Proposed Order. Re-file the motion as a Corrected Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice - attach the correct signed PDF - select the correct named filer/filers - attach valid Certificates of Good Standing issued within the past 30 days - attach Proposed Order. (laq)

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: Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Sirius XM Radio 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 ]
Plaintiff: Cedar Lane Technologies Inc.
Represented By: Isaac Rabicoff
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?