Flexible Innovations Ltd v. IdeaMax et al
Plaintiff: Flexible Innovations Ltd
Defendant: Eugene Lee, IdeaMax and Aekyung Lee
Case Number: 4:2014cv00321
Filed: May 8, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office: Fort Worth Office
County: Tarrant
Presiding Judge: Terry R Means
Nature of Suit: Trademark
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 31, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 31 Memorandum Opinion and Order: The court ORDERS that the claims and causes of action asserted by plaintiff in Count 5 of plaintiff's complaint, as alleged in paragraph 38 on page 9 of such complaint, be, and are hereby, severed into a separate action to be carried on the docket of this court as Case No. 4:14-CV-884-A, bearing the style "Flexible Innovations Ltd., Plaintiff, v. IdeaMax, Eugene Lee, and Aekyung Lee, Defendants," and that the clerk of court include in the papers o f such severed action a copy of the complaint, with accompanying exhibits, filed by plaintiff on May 8, 2014, along with a copy of this order. The court further ORDERS that by November 10, 2014, plaintiff file an amended complaint in Case No. 4:14-CV -884-A limiting its claims and causes of action to the claims and causes of action alleged in Count 5 of the complaint in the instant action, and that defendants file and serve an answer to such Count 5 allegations in Case No. 4:14-CV-884-A by Novemb er 21, 2014. The court further ORDERS that all claims and causes of action asserted by plaintiff against defendants in its complaint in the instant action other than the Count 5 contempt claims and causes of action be, and are hereby, dismissed bec ause of plaintiff's failure to carry its burden of establishing in personam jurisdiction over defendants as to such dismissed claims and causes of action. The court determines that there is no just reason for delay in, and hereby directs, entry of final judgment as to such dismissal. (Ordered by Judge John McBryde on 10/31/2014) (mdf)
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 this case: Flexible Innovations Ltd v. IdeaMax et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Eugene Lee
Represented By: Frederic M Douglas
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: IdeaMax
Represented By: Frederic M Douglas
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: Aekyung Lee
Represented By: Frederic M Douglas
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: Flexible Innovations Ltd
Represented By: Richard L Schwartz
Represented By: Thomas F Harkins, Jr
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?