Magnesium Machine, LLC et al v. Terves LLC et al

Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Ohio Northern District Magnesium Machine, LLC et al v. Terves LLC et al

Magnesium Machine, LLC et al v. Terves LLC et al

Case Number:	1:2019cv02818
Filed:	July 14, 2020
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Office:	Cleveland Office
Nature of Suit:	Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action:	18 U.S.C. § 1836 (a) Injunction against Misappropriation of Trade Secrets

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
September 9, 2020	Filing 66 Memorandum Opinion and Order. Plaintiffs behavior as a party in this litigation has been less than fully professional or forthright, and their positions have not been based on a reasonable factual or legal interpretation of the actual circums tances at issue. Further, their attorneys have unreasonably and vexatiously multiplied the proceedings in this litigation. The Court finds that Defendant, Terves' request for the imposition of attorney fees well supported, and that Plaintiffs an d their attorneys shall be jointly and severally liable for those fees. For the reasons set forth, Defendant Terves, LLC's Motion for Attorneys' Fees (ECF # 62 ) is GRANTED. Terves shall have fourteen days to submit proof of the value of the fees incurred. Plaintiffs shall have seven days to submit any objection they may have to the proof submitted by Plaintiffs. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 9/9/2020. (M,S)
July 14, 2020	Filing 58 Memorandum Opinion and Order. For the reasons set forth, the Court finds that Terves, LLC's Motion to Dismiss Complaint Under Rule 12(b)(6) (ECF # 42 , 45 ), and the Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of McDonald Hopkins. (ECF # 41 , 45 ), should be GRANTED. This case is dismissed with prejudice. Costs to be paid by the Plaintiff. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 7/14/2020. (M,S)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 9, 2020

Filing 66 Memorandum Opinion and Order. Plaintiffs behavior as a party in this litigation has been less than fully professional or forthright, and their positions have not been based on a reasonable factual or legal interpretation of the actual circums tances at issue. Further, their attorneys have unreasonably and vexatiously multiplied the proceedings in this litigation. The Court finds that Defendant, Terves' request for the imposition of attorney fees well supported, and that Plaintiffs an d their attorneys shall be jointly and severally liable for those fees. For the reasons set forth, Defendant Terves, LLC's Motion for Attorneys' Fees (ECF # 62 ) is GRANTED. Terves shall have fourteen days to submit proof of the value of the fees incurred. Plaintiffs shall have seven days to submit any objection they may have to the proof submitted by Plaintiffs. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 9/9/2020. (M,S)

July 14, 2020

Filing 58 Memorandum Opinion and Order. For the reasons set forth, the Court finds that Terves, LLC's Motion to Dismiss Complaint Under Rule 12(b)(6) (ECF # 42 , 45 ), and the Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of McDonald Hopkins. (ECF # 41 , 45 ), should be GRANTED. This case is dismissed with prejudice. Costs to be paid by the Plaintiff. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 7/14/2020. (M,S)

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 Ohio Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Magnesium Machine, LLC et al v. Terves LLC et al
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| 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?