Hitel Technologies LLC v. Tapestry, Inc.
| Hitel Technologies LLC |
| Tapestry, Inc. |
| 6:2022cv00113 |
| January 31, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Texas |
| Alan D Albright |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 ANSWER to #1 Complaint with Jury Demand , COUNTERCLAIM against Hitel Technologies LLC by Tapestry, Inc..(McNabnay, Neil) |
| Filing 7 Certificate of Interested Parties by Tapestry, Inc.. (McNabnay, Neil) |
| Parties shall comply with Judge Albright's updated #standing orders and # COVID-19 standing order available by clicking the included hyperlinks. The updated orders are as follows:1. #Standing Order Regarding Notice of Readiness for Patent Cases 030722,2. #Standing Order on Pretrial Procedures and Requirements in Civil Cases 030722,3. #Standing Order Governing Proceedings 4.0 - Patent Cases 030722,4. #Amended Standing Order Regarding Coronavirus (COVID-19) and Court Proceedings,5. #Amended Standing Order Regarding Joint Or Unopposed Request To Change Deadlines 030722,6. #Amended Standing Order Regarding Filing Documents Under Seal and Redacted Public Versions 030722. (jkda) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Agreed Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Complaint by Tapestry, Inc. re #1 Complaint (McNabnay, Neil) |
| Reset Deadlines: Tapestry, Inc. answer due 3/31/2022. (zv) |
| Filing 5 Summons Issued as to Tapestry, Inc.. (lad) |
| Filing 4 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS by Hitel Technologies LLC. (Mort, Raymond) |
| Filing 3 RULE 7 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Hitel Technologies LLC. (Mort, Raymond) |
| Filing 2 Notice of Filing of Patent/Trademark Form (AO 120). AO 120 forwarded to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (Mort, Raymond) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0542-15664631), filed by Hitel Technologies LLC. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit)(Mort, Raymond) |
| All parties shall comply with the Standing Orders located at https://www.txwd.uscourts.gov/judges-information/standing-orders/. (lad) |
| Case assigned to Judge Alan D Albright. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (lad) |
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 Western 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: Hitel Technologies LLC v. Tapestry, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Hitel Technologies LLC | |
| Represented By: | Raymond W Mort, III |
| 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: Tapestry, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Adil Anjum Shaikh |
| Represented By: | David Brandon Conrad |
| Represented By: | Neil J. McNabnay |
| 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.
