InnoMemory, LLC v. Alliance Bank
| InnoMemory, LLC |
| Alliance Bank |
| 2:2025cv00106 |
| February 1, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas |
| Roy S Payne |
| Robert W Schroeder |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 7, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(a)(1) Disclosure Statement filed by Alliance Bank identifying Corporate Parent Alliance Bancshares, Inc. for Alliance Bank. (Jensen, William) |
| Filing 9 Unopposed Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint is granted. Alliance Bank answer is now due 4/28/2025. (Text entry only, no document attached.)(NKL) |
| Filing 8 Unopposed Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint filed by Alliance Bank. Summons originally served on 2/19/2025. Agreed new answer date is 4/28/2025.(Jensen, William) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by James Elmore Hudson, III on behalf of Alliance Bank (Hudson, James) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by William Powell Jensen on behalf of Alliance Bank (Jensen, William) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS Issued as to Alliance Bank. (KLC) |
| Case Assigned to District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. (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 4 Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120). AO 120 emailed to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (Rabicoff, Isaac) |
| Filing 3 Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1(a)(1) Disclosure Statement filed by InnoMemory, LLC (Rabicoff, Isaac) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Isaac Phillip Rabicoff on behalf of InnoMemory, LLC (Rabicoff, Isaac) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Patent Infringement against Alliance Bank ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ATXEDC-10653709.), filed by InnoMemory, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Rabicoff, Isaac) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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: InnoMemory, LLC v. Alliance Bank | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: InnoMemory, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Isaac Phillip Rabicoff |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Alliance Bank | |
| Represented By: | James Elmore Hudson, III |
| Represented By: | William Powell Jensen |
| 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 | [ 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.
