LHF Productions, Inc v. Doe 1 et al
| LHF Productions, Inc |
| Doe 1, Doe 2, Doe 3, Doe 4, Doe 5, Doe 6, Doe 7, Doe 8, Doe 9, Doe 10, Doe 11, Doe 12, Doe 13, Doe 14, Doe 15, Doe 16, Doe 17 and Doe 18 |
| 2:2016cv00731 |
| May 20, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Seattle Office |
| King |
| Robert S. Lasnik |
| Copyrights |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
94
MINUTE ORDER striking as moot plaintiff's 89 Motion for Extension of Time by Judge Ricardo S Martinez.(RS) cc pro se parties
|
|
Filing
87
ORDER by Chief Judge Ricardo S. Martinez granting in part and denying in part 70 Motion for Default Judgment as to Farnaz Carza; granting in part and denying in part 72 Motion for Default Judgment as to Valera Kotelevskiy; granting in part and denying in part 74 Motion for Default Judgment Royd Malama; granting in part and denying in part 76 Motion for Default Judgment Max Mamotyuk; granting in part and denying in part 78 Motion for Default Judgment as to Maria Pedro; granting in part and denying in part 80 Motion for Default Judgment Monika Cummings; granting in part and denying in part 82 Motion for Default Judgment as to Johnson Pham; granting in part and denying in part 84 Motion for Default Judgment as to Reynar Rosas. (SSM) Modified on 2/15/2017: copy sent to Defendants Pao Hang and Son Huynh via the USPS (PM).
|
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 Washington 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
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.
