Mars, Incorporated v. Bil-Jac Foods, Inc.
| Mars, Incorporated and Mars Petcare US, Inc. |
| Bil-Jac Foods, Inc., U.S. Pet Nutrition, LLC., Thai Union International, Inc. and Kelly Foods Corporation |
| 3:2013cv00928 |
| September 12, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Nashville Office |
| Davidson |
| Joe Brown |
| Todd J. Campbell |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1051 |
| 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
83
ORDER Amending Case Management Order: Discovery due by 12/8/2014. Dispositive Motions due by 4/8/2015. Counsel should read the order in its entirety for all other deadlines and information. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 7/29/2014. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.) (ds)
|
|
Filing
81
AGREED ORDER: Bil-Jac, Kelly, and Mars have entered into a confidential Settlement Agreement relating to the subject matter of this litigation, and the terms of the Parties' confidential Settlement Agreement. Mars's claims against Bil-Ja c and Kelly are hereby dismissed with prejudice. Bil-Jac and Kelly's counterclaims against Mars are hereby dismissed with prejudice. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 6/20/14. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
77
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 5/2/14. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
75
ORDER: Telephone Conference held on 3/31/2014, to discuss the possibility of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). At the present time all parties did not believe that a settlement conference at this early stage would be useful. The parties did not see a need to modify the present scheduling order. They advised that they were working on an electronic stored information protocol and protective order. The Magistrate Judge will be willing to sign an agreed protocol and protective order. Should the parties have a disagreement they should schedule a further telephone conference with the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 3/31/14. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
70
INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: Motion to Amend Pleadings due by 7/7/2014. Discovery due by 10/7/2014. Dispositive Motions due by 2/27/2015. A telephone conference with Magistrate Judge Brown to report on alternative dispute resolution progress is set for March 31, 2014, at 10:30 a.m. To participate in the conference call, parties will call 615-695-2851 at the scheduled time. A telephone conference with Magistrate Judge Brown to discuss case progress is set for November 17, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. To participate in the conference call, parties will call 615-695-2851 at the scheduled time. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 2/19/14. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt)
|
|
Filing
68
ORDER: Plaintiffs have filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Defendant Thai Union International, Inc. 67 . Accordingly, Plaintiffs' claims against Defendant Thai Union International, Inc. are DISMISSED without prejudice. Defendant Thai Union International's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction 57 is DENIED as moot. Signed by District Judge Todd J. Campbell on 2/18/14. (dt)
|
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 Tennessee 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.
