Mary Kay Inc v. Wanza et al
| Mary Kay Inc |
| John Does 1-10, FAITH BY DESIGN, BEVERLY WANZA and Faith By Design LLC |
| 3:2019cv02266 |
| September 23, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Barbara M G Lynn |
| Brantley Starr |
| Property Rights: Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1114 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 1, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ELECTRONIC ORDER granting #12 Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer. Defendant Faith By Design, LLC's answer is due on 12/2/2019; Defendant Beverly Wanza's answer is due on 12/2/2019. (Ordered by Judge Brantley Starr on 11/1/2019) (chmb)
|
| Filing 12 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond filed by Faith By Design LLC, Beverly Wanza (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)Attorney Michael B Regitz added to party Faith By Design LLC(pty:dft), Attorney Michael B Regitz added to party Beverly Wanza(pty:dft) (Regitz, Michael) |
|
Filing 11
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting #8 Motion for Substitute Service on Defendant Beverly Wanza. (Ordered by Judge Brantley Starr on 10/28/2019) (twd)
|
| Filing 10 SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Faith By Design LLC ; served on 10/10/2019. (sre) |
| Filing 9 Appendix in Support filed by Mary Kay Inc re #8 MOTION Substitute Service of Process (Schwegmann, Christopher) |
| Filing 8 MOTION For Substitute Service of Process filed by Mary Kay Inc (Schwegmann, Christopher) |
| Filing 7 Court Request for Recusal: Chief Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn recused. Pursuant to instruction in Special Order 3-249, the Clerk has reassigned the case to Judge Brantley Starr for all further proceedings. Future filings should indicate the case number as: 3:19-cv-2266-X. (ctf) |
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Faith By Design LLC, John Does 1-10, Beverly Wanza. (sre) |
| Filing 5 Report to Patent/Trademark Office of Initiating Document. Form AO 120 e-mailed to notice_of_suit@uspto.gov. (sre) |
| Filing 4 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Ramirez). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (sre) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Mary Kay Inc. (Schwegmann, Christopher) |
| Filing 2 ***Please Disregard per Attorney - corrected CIP to be filed*** CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Mary Kay Inc. (Schwegmann, Christopher) Modified on 9/23/2019 (rekc). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND against All Defendants filed by Mary Kay Inc. (Filing fee $400; Receipt number 0539-10285971) Clerk to issue summons(es). In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the # Judges Copy Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: #1 Cover Sheet) (Schwegmann, Christopher) |
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 Northern 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.
