GS Holistic, LLC v. Best Budz Smoke Shop LLC et al
| GS Holistic, LLC |
| Best Budz Smoke Shop LLC, Azzam Abdalla, Abdullah Arman, Best Budz Smoke Shop LLC doing business as Northpointe Smoke Shop and Abdalla Azzam |
| 2:2023cv03601 |
| October 30, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Michael R Merz |
| Sarah D Morrison |
| Walter H Rice |
| Chelsey M Vascura |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Walter H. Rice and Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz for all further proceedings. Judge Sarah D. Morrison, Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura, Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers, Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson no longer assigned to case. Signed by Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley on 12/19/23. (jcw)
|
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Azzam Abdalla, Abdullah Arman, and Best Budz Smoke Shop LLC (Attachments: #1 Summons Form Azzam, #2 Summons Form Arman) (kk2) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 paid - receipt number: AOHSDC-9667315), filed by GS Holistic, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Summons Form, #4 Summons Form, #5 Summons Form) (Hoffman, John) |
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 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.
