Mexichem Amanco Holding, S.A. de C.V. v. The Chemours Company
| Mexichem Amanco Holding, S.A. de C.V. |
| The Chemours Company |
| 4:2020cv01960 |
| June 3, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Peter Bray |
| Lynn N Hughes |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 19 NOTICE of Resetting. Parties notified. Initial Conference set for 8/25/2020 at 11:00 AM in by video before Magistrate Judge Peter Bray, filed. (jmarchand, 4) |
| Filing 18 NOTICE of Appearance by Bailey K. Benedict on behalf of The Chemours Company, filed. (Benedict, Bailey) |
Filing 17
ORDER granting #16 Motion for Extension of Time; Answer due for The Chemours Company 8/10/2020.(Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter Bray) Parties notified.(jmarchand, 4)
|
| Filing 16 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to ComplaintMotions referred to Peter Bray. by The Chemours Company, filed. Motion Docket Date 7/10/2020. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Lane, John) |
| Filing 15 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by The Chemours Company, filed.(Lane, John) |
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Appearance by John R. Lane on behalf of The Chemours Company, filed. (Lane, John) |
|
Filing 13
ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Initial Conference set for 8/20/2020 at 11:30 AM in by video before Magistrate Judge Peter Bray(Signed by Magistrate Judge Peter Bray) Parties notified.(jmarchand, 4)
|
| Filing 12 RETURN of Service of SUMMONS Executed as to The Chemours Company served on 6/4/2020, answer due 6/25/2020, filed.(Berghammer, Joseph) |
| Filing 11 General Reference to Magistrate Judge Peter Bray. (Signed by Judge Lynn N Hughes) Parties notified. The initial conference set for 9/8/2020 before Judge Lynn N. Hughes is cancelled. (ghassan, 4) |
|
Filing 10
ORDER granting #5 Motion for Eric J. Hamp to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (Signed by Judge Lynn N Hughes) Parties notified. (ghassan, 4)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER granting #4 Motion for Michael L. Krashin to Appear Pro Hac Vice. (Signed by Judge Lynn N Hughes) Parties notified. (ghassan, 4)
|
| Filing 8 US Patent and Trademark Office Notified. AO 120, filed. (Attachments: #1 Complaint) (JosephWellsadi, 4) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER FOR CONFERENCE. Initial Conference set for 9/8/2020 at 10:00 AM in Room 11122 before Judge Lynn N Hughes (Signed by Judge Lynn N Hughes) Parties notified.(JosephWellsadi, 4)
|
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to The Chemours Company. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(DawnWaggoner, 4) |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Eric J. Hamp to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Mexichem Amanco Holding, S.A. de C.V., filed. Motion Docket Date 6/24/2020. (Berghammer, Joseph) |
| Filing 4 MOTION for Michael L. Krashin to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Mexichem Amanco Holding, S.A. de C.V., filed. Motion Docket Date 6/24/2020. (Berghammer, Joseph) |
| Filing 3 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Mexichem Amanco Holding, S.A. de C.V., filed.(Berghammer, Joseph) |
| Filing 2 Request for Issuance of Summons as to The Chemours Company, filed.(Berghammer, Joseph) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against The Chemours Company (Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0541-24748525) filed by Mexichem Amanco Holding, S.A. de C.V.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(Berghammer, Joseph) |
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 Southern 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.
