Digital Verification Systems, LLC v. PandaDoc, Inc.
| Digital Verification Systems, LLC |
| PandaDoc, Inc. |
| 2:2017cv00406 |
| May 9, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas |
| Marshall Office |
| Anderson |
| Roy S Payne |
| Robert W Schroeder |
| Patent |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1338 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 11, 2017. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne on 10/11/2017. (nkl, )
|
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Digital Verification Systems, LLC (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Harper, Matthew) |
| Filing 6 Defendant's Unopposed Second Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint re PandaDoc, Inc..(Pan, Henry) |
| Defendant's Unopposed Second Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint is GRANTED pursuant to Local Rule CV-12 for PandaDoc, Inc. to 10/21/2017. 15 Days Granted for Deadline Extension.( sm, ) |
| Filing 5 Defendant's Unopposed First Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint re PandaDoc, Inc.(Pan, Henry) |
| Defendant's Unopposed First Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint is GRANTED pursuant to Local Rule CV-12 for PandaDoc, Inc. to 10/6/2017. 30 Days Granted for Deadline Extension.( sm, ) |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Digital Verification Systems, LLC. PandaDoc, Inc. served on 8/16/2017, answer due 9/6/2017. (ch, ) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS Issued as to PandaDoc, Inc.. (nkl, ) |
|
Filing 2
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. Signed by Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 5/11/2017. (nkl, )
|
| Case Assigned to Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III. (nkl, ) |
| In accordance with the provisions of 28 USC Section 636(c), you are hereby notified that a U.S. Magistrate Judge of this district court is available to conduct any or all proceedings in this case including a jury or non-jury trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. The form #Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge is available on our website. All signed consent forms, excluding pro se parties, should be filed electronically using the event Notice Regarding Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge. (nkl, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against PandaDoc, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0540-6285285.), filed by Digital Verification Systems, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit)(Harper, Matthew) |
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 Texas Eastern 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
| Search for this case: Digital Verification Systems, LLC v. PandaDoc, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: PandaDoc, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Henry Ting-Hsi Pan |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Digital Verification Systems, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Matthew Paul Harper |
| 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.
