Electric Mirror, LLC et al v. Majestic Mirror & Frame, LLC
Plaintiff: Electric Mirror LLC and Kelvin 42 LLC
Defendant: Majestic Mirror & Frame LLC
Case Number: 2:2017cv00352
Filed: March 7, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Washington
Office: Seattle Office
County: Snohomish
Presiding Judge: Thomas S. Zilly
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 271
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 36 MINUTE ORDER re parties' 33 Stipulation, extending following deadlines: FRCP 26f Conference Deadline is 11/30/2017, Initial Disclosure Deadline is 12/14/2017, Joint Status Report due by 12/14/2017 ; granting in part and striking in part without prejudice defendant's 26 Motion to Dismiss or in the alternative transfer venue ; this case is TRANSFERRED to the Southern District of Florida, effective immediately. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(SWT)
August 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 24 MINUTE ORDER granting plaintiff's 21 Motion to amend; plaintiff's amended complaint due within 7 days by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(RS)
August 14, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 22 MINUTE ORDER lifting the stay in this matter; RESETTING the following deadlines: FRCP 26f Conference Deadline is 10/30/2017, Initial Disclosure Deadline is 11/13/2017, Joint Status Report due by 11/13/2017. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)
May 25, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 18 MINUTE ORDER striking plaintiffs' 15 Motion to amend the complaint ; granting defendant's consented 17 Motion to stay; Joint Status Report due within 21 days after determination or by 1/24/2018, whichever occurs earlier by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(RS)
April 7, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 14 MINUTE ORDER granting Defendant Majestic Mirror & Frame LLC's 13 Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer; Deadline for Majestic Mirror & Frame LLC to answer complaint is EXTENDED to 5/26/2017. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)
March 29, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 12 MINUTE ORDER granting defendant's 11 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(RS)
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 Washington Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Electric Mirror, LLC et al v. Majestic Mirror & Frame, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Electric Mirror LLC
Represented By: Brock M Hartman
Represented By: Kyle D Netterfield
Represented By: Stephen J Rosenman(Designation Admission Pro Hac Vice)
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 ]
Plaintiff: Kelvin 42 LLC
Represented By: Brock M Hartman
Represented By: Kyle D Netterfield
Represented By: Stephen J Rosenman(Designation Admission Pro Hac Vice)
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: Majestic Mirror & Frame LLC
Represented By: Thomas Shewmake
Represented By: E Russell Tarleton
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?