Cases 1 - 8 of 8
v. H & M Gopher Control, a California general partnership et al
as 1:2017at00943
Plaintiff:
H & M Gopher Control, a California general partnership and Allen Hurlburt
Defendant:
Benchmark Pest Control, Inc. and Andrew Ozanich
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338
H & M Gopher Control, et al v. Benchmark Pest Control, Inc., et al
as 1:2017cv01700
Plaintiff:
H & M Gopher Control and Allen Hurlburt
Defendant:
Benchmark Pest Control, Inc. and Andrew Ozanich
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338
Capital Mailing Services, Inc. v. Salt Creek Media, Inc. et al
as 2:2015at01166
Defendant:
Salt Creek Media, Inc., Andrew Cody, Matthew Kelsoe and others
Plaintiff:
Capital Mailing Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Capital Mailing Services, Inc. v. Salt Creek Media, Inc., et al.
as 2:2015cv02337
Defendant:
Salt Creek Media, Inc. , Andrew Cody , Matthew Kelsoe and others
Plaintiff:
Capital Mailing Services, Inc.
Counter_claimant:
Andrew Cody
Counter_defendant:
Capital Mailing Services, Inc. , APC Holding & Management, Inc. and Perice D Sibley
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Sign Designs, Inc. v. Gay et al
as 2:2011cv00313
Plaintiff:
Sign Designs, Inc.
Defendant:
Charles Gay , Andrew Soares , Brian Campbell and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
SIGN DESIGNS, INC. v. Gay et al
as 2:2011at00137
Plaintiff:
SIGN DESIGNS, INC.
Defendant:
Charles Gay, ANDREW SOARES, BRIAN CAMPBELL and others
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Controversy Music et al v. Hemant
as 1:2007cv01430
Plaintiff:
Controversy Music, Words & Music, Donald Kahn and others
Defendant:
Patel Bhavana Hemant
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Controversy Music et al v. Hemant
as 1:2007at00501
Plaintiff:
Controversy Music, Words & Music, Donald Kahn and others
Defendant:
Patel Bhavana Hemant
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
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.
