Cedar Lane Technologies Inc v. Latecoere International Inc
| Cedar Lane Technologies Inc |
| Latecoere International, Inc. and Latecoere International Inc |
| 2:2022cv00906 |
| June 28, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| James L Robart |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 271 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Notice of Filing Deficiency re #1 Complaint,. ***Action Required*** Summons Form Incomplete.See attached letter for more information and instructions. (MJV) |
| Filing 3 REPORT on the filing or determination of an action. Emailed to the US Patent Office (MJV) |
| Judge James L. Robart added. (MJV) |
| Filing 2 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT indicating no Corporate Parents and/or Affiliates. Filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1. Filed by Cedar Lane Technologies Inc (Mann, Philip) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT For Patent Infringement against defendant(s) Latecoere International, Inc. with JURY DEMAND (Receipt # AWAWDC-7608921) Attorney Philip P Mann added to party Cedar Lane Technologies Inc(pty:pla), filed by Cedar Lane Technologies Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Civil Cover Sheet, #6 Report on Patents and Trademarks (AO Form 120), #7 Summons)(Mann, Philip) |
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 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.
