Evrythng Limited v. Avery Dennison Retail Information Services LLC et al
Evrythng limited |
Avery Dennison Retail Information Services LLC and Avery Dennison RFID Company |
1:2021cv04411 |
May 17, 2021 |
US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
Lewis J Liman |
Defend Trade Secrets Act (of 2016) |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 23, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (vf) (gp). |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Avery Dennison RFID Company, Avery Dennison Retail Information Services LLC. (Filing Fee $ $402.00, Receipt Number 465401279628)Document filed by Evrything Limited.(vf) (Additional attachment(s) added on 5/17/2021: #1 Redacted Complaint, #2 Redacted Complaint) (gp). |
ORDER REDACTING PLEADING FILED IN 21-MC-443. Document filed by Evrything Limited. (vf) |
SUMMONS ISSUED as to Avery Dennison RFID Company. (vf) |
Case Designated ECF. (vf) |
Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (vf) |
SUMMONS ISSUED as to Avery Dennison Retail Information Services LLC. (vf) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.