Hyatt v. Vidal
Counter Defendant: Gilbert P. Hyatt
Counter Claimant: Katherine K. Vidal
Case Number: 1:2022cv01118
Filed: October 4, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Presiding Judge: Ivan D Davis
Referring Judge: Michael S Nachmanoff
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 145 Patent Non-Infringement- Patent Applicant is Dissatisfied with PTO Decision
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 13, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 13, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER granting #10 Joint MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Related Case (see Order for further details). Signed by District Judge Michael S Nachmanoff on 2/13/2023. (show)
February 10, 2023 Filing 10 Joint MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Related Case by Gilbert P. Hyatt. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(DeLaquil, Mark)
February 9, 2023 Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Hugham Chan on behalf of Katherine K. Vidal (Chan, Hugham)
February 9, 2023 Filing 8 ANSWER to Complaint , COUNTERCLAIM against Gilbert P. Hyatt by Katherine K. Vidal.(Chan, Hugham)
January 3, 2023 Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Gilbert P. Hyatt. Katherine K. Vidal served on 12/22/2022, answer due 2/21/2023. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Service (U.S. Attorney General), #2 Affidavit of Service (U.S. Attorney for the EDVA))(DeLaquil, Mark)
October 5, 2022 Filing 6 Summons Issued as to Katherine K. Vidal, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General NOTICE TO ATTORNEY: Please remove the headers and print two duplexed copies of the electronically issued summons for each Defendant. Please serve one copy of the summons and a copy of the Complaint upon each Defendant. Please ensure that your process server returns the service copy (executed or unexecuted) to your attention and electronically file it using the filing events, Summons Returned Executed as to USA or Summons Returned Unexecuted as to USA. (Attachments: #1 Notice to Attorney) (nlop)
October 4, 2022 Initial Case Assignment to District Judge Michael S Nachmanoff and Magistrate Judge Ivan D. Davis. (nlop)
October 4, 2022 Filing 5 NOTICE by Gilbert P. Hyatt (Proposed AO 120 Form) (DeLaquil, Mark)
October 4, 2022 Filing 4 Proposed Summons to the U.S. Attorney for the EDVA by Gilbert P. Hyatt. (DeLaquil, Mark)
October 4, 2022 Filing 3 Proposed Summons to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office by Gilbert P. Hyatt. (DeLaquil, Mark)
October 4, 2022 Filing 2 Proposed Summons to the Attorney General of the United States by Gilbert P. Hyatt. (DeLaquil, Mark)
October 4, 2022 Filing 1 Complaint ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AVAEDC-8598175.), filed by Gilbert P. Hyatt. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(DeLaquil, Mark)

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 Virginia Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hyatt v. Vidal
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Counter defendant: Gilbert P. Hyatt
Represented By: Mark Wendell DeLaquil
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 ]
Counter claimant: Katherine K. Vidal
Represented By: Hugham Chan
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?