Roto-Rooter Corporation v. Core Pacific, Inc.
| Roto-Rooter Corporation |
| CORE PACIFIC, INC. |
| 4:2022cv04246 |
| December 8, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Keith P Ellison |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1051 Trademark Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 21, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER granting #9 Motion for Julie K. Valdes to Appear Pro Hac Vice Note: Instructions to request Texas Southern CM/ECF registration through PACER are found #here.(Signed by Judge Keith P Ellison) Parties notified.(gclair, 4)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER granting #8 Motion for Gregory F. Ahrens to Appear Pro Hac Vice Note: Instructions to request Texas Southern CM/ECF registration through PACER are found #here.(Signed by Judge Keith P Ellison) Parties notified.(gclair, 4)
|
| Filing 9 MOTION for Julie K. Valdes to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Roto-Rooter Corporation, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/11/2023. (Smith, James) |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Gregory F. Ahrens to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Roto-Rooter Corporation, filed. Motion Docket Date 1/11/2023. (Smith, James) |
| Filing 7 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Roto-Rooter Corporation identifying CHEMED CORPORATION as Corporate Parent, filed.(Smith, James) |
| Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Core Pacific, Inc.. Issued summons delivered to plaintiff by NEF, filed.(hlerma, 4) |
| Filing 5 Request for Issuance of Summons as to All Defendants, filed.(Smith, James) |
| Filing 4 First AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against All Defendants filed by Roto-Rooter Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6)(Smith, James) |
| Filing 3 US Patent and Trademark Office Notified. AO 120, filed. (Attachments: #1 Complaint) (BrandisIsom, 4) |
|
Filing 2
ORDER for Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference and Order to Disclose Interested Persons. Initial Conference set for 4/14/2023 at 02:30 PM in Courtroom 3A Houston before Judge Keith P Ellison. (Signed by Judge Keith P Ellison) Parties notified.(BrandisIsom, 4)
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ATXSDC-29174085) filed by Roto-Rooter Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Civil Cover Sheet)(Smith, James) |
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
| Search for this case: Roto-Rooter Corporation v. Core Pacific, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Roto-Rooter Corporation | |
| Represented By: | James David Smith |
| Represented By: | Julie Valdes |
| Represented By: | Gregory F. Ahrens |
| 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: CORE PACIFIC, INC. | |
| 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.
