Stoett Industries, Inc. et al v. Irvine Shade & Door, Inc.

Plaintiff: Stoett Industries, Inc. and Newline International, LLC
Defendant: Irvine Shade & Door, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2019cv01104
Filed: May 16, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Presiding Judge: James G Carr
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 16, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 16, 2019 Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Stoett Industries, Inc.. (Strup, David)
May 16, 2019 Notice by Clerk that Stoett Industries, Inc. failed to file a corporate disclosure statement as required by Local Rule 3.13(b). (R,Ke)
May 16, 2019 Notice re Prompt Service. Counsel for Plaintiff is responsible for promptly serving the Complaint on Defendant(s) upon receiving the issued summons from the Clerk and, after service has been perfected, electronically filing a Return of Service or an executed Waiver of Service for each Defendant.Service is to be accomplished pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, which includes provisions for personal service and waiver of service, and Local Rule 4.2. If you wish the Clerk to serve the Complaint on Defendant(s) (a seldom used alternative because it does not save time or money), you must provide the Clerk's office with copies of the Complaint along with other necessary documents, in the manner set forth in Local Rule 4.2(a). (R,Ke)
May 16, 2019 Filing 2 Original Summons and Magistrate Consent Form issued to counsel for service upon Irvine Shade & Door, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Consent Form) (R,Ke)
May 16, 2019 This action has been identified as a Patent Case that is subject to the Local Patent Rules. Link to #Local Patent Rules. (R,Ke)
May 16, 2019 Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge James R. Knepp, II. (R,Ke)
May 16, 2019 Judge James G. Carr assigned to case. (R,Ke)
May 16, 2019 Filing 1 Complaint with jury demand against Irvine Shade & Door, Inc.. Filing fee paid $ 400, Receipt number 0647-9312830.. Filed by Stoett Industries, Inc., Newline International, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons, #3 Exhibit A - Patent, #4 Exhibit B - Assignment, #5 Exhibit C - License Agreement, #6 Exhibit D - Photos-Stoett, #7 Exhibit E - Photos-Slow Roll) (Strup, David)

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: Stoett Industries, Inc. et al v. Irvine Shade & Door, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Stoett Industries, Inc.
Represented By: Michael E. Dockins
Represented By: David P. Strup
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Newline International, LLC
Represented By: Michael E. Dockins
Represented By: David P. Strup
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Irvine Shade & Door, 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 [ 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?