VOGEL v. WOLTERS KLUWER HEALTH, INC. et al
| FRANCIS STEPHEN VOGEL |
| WOLTERS KLUWER UNITED STATES, INC., WOLTERS KLUWER HEALTH, INC. and WOLTERS KLUWER U.S. CORPORATION |
| 1:2007cv00062 |
| January 24, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina |
| Durham Office |
| Durham |
| WALLACE W. DIXON |
| WILLIAM L. OSTEEN |
| Copyright |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 501 Copyright Infringement |
| 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
40
ORDER signed by CHIEF JUDGE JAMES A. BEATY, JR., on 12/30/2008, that the Recommendation (Document # 34 ) is ADOPTED, and for the reasons set out in the Recommendation, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Document # 23 ) is GRANTED. As a result of th is determination, Plaintiff's claims for false designation of origin under the Lanham Act (Count 2) and unfair and deceptive trade practices under state law (Count 3) are DISMISSED. In addition, Defendant John Q. Troganowski is dismissed for la ck of personal jurisdiction. The sole remaining claim in this case is Plaintiff's claim for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act (Count 1) against Defendants Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. d/b/a Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Wolters Kluwer United States, Inc., and Wolters Kluwer U.S. Corporation, and that claim will go forward in this case. (Lloyd, Donna)
|
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 North Carolina Middle 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.
