THE DILLE FAMILY TRUST v. THE NOWLAN FAMILY TRUST

Justia Dockets & Filings Third Circuit Pennsylvania Eastern District THE DILLE FAMILY TRUST v. THE NOWLAN FAMILY TRUST

THE DILLE FAMILY TRUST v. THE NOWLAN FAMILY TRUST

Plaintiff:	THE DILLE FAMILY TRUST
Defendant:	THE NOWLAN FAMILY TRUST
Case Number:	2:2015cv06231
Filed:	November 19, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Philadelphia Office
County:	Outside the State of PA.
Presiding Judge:	WENDY BEETLESTONE
Nature of Suit:	Review or Appeal of Agency Decision
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

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
August 25, 2017	Filing 155 ORDER THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE EXPERT REPORT AND TESTIMONY OF JEFF ROVIN IS GRANTED; DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE EXPERT REPORT AND TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL LAZZARA IS GRANTED; DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 8/25/17. 8/25/17 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED TO COUNSEL.(jaa, )
September 16, 2016	Filing 55 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION IS DENIED WITH RESPECT TO COUNT II. MOTION IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART WITH RESPECT TO COUNT III AS OUTLINED HEREIN. DEFENDANTS MOTION IS GRANTED WITH RESPECT TO COUNT IV (STATE LAW TRADEMARK CLAIMS) AND COUNT IV IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 9/16/16. 9/16/16 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED.(rf, )

Date Filed

Document Text

August 25, 2017

Filing 155 ORDER THAT DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE EXPERT REPORT AND TESTIMONY OF JEFF ROVIN IS GRANTED; DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE THE EXPERT REPORT AND TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL LAZZARA IS GRANTED; DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 8/25/17. 8/25/17 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED TO COUNSEL.(jaa, )

September 16, 2016

Filing 55 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION IS DENIED WITH RESPECT TO COUNT II. MOTION IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART WITH RESPECT TO COUNT III AS OUTLINED HEREIN. DEFENDANTS MOTION IS GRANTED WITH RESPECT TO COUNT IV (STATE LAW TRADEMARK CLAIMS) AND COUNT IV IS DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE WENDY BEETLESTONE ON 9/16/16. 9/16/16 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED.(rf, )

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 Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: THE DILLE FAMILY TRUST v. THE NOWLAN FAMILY TRUST
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: THE DILLE FAMILY TRUST
Represented By:	DANIEL I. HERMAN
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	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: THE NOWLAN FAMILY TRUST
Represented By:	MAX S. MORGAN
Represented By:	JOHN J. O'MALLEY
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	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| 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?