Trademark Cases
Cases 41 - 50 of 57
B & B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 11-1247
Plaintiff - Appellant: B & B Hardware, Inc., a California Corporation
Defendant - Appellee: Hargis Industries, Inc., a Texas Corporation, doing business as Sealtite Building Fasteners, doing business as East Texas Fasteners, East Texas Fasteners, a business entity of form unknown and John Does, 1 through 10, inclusive
Olayan Investments Company Establishment et al v. John Does 1 through 10 Featured Case
as 1:2010cv09392
Plaintiff: Olayan Investments Company Establishment and Crel/Oac L.L.C.
Defendant: John Does 1 through 10
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
Koon Chun Hing Kee Soy & Sauce v. Star Mark Management, Inc.
as 10-4223
Plaintiff - Appellee: Koon Chun Hing Kee Soy & Sauce Factory, Ltd., a company organized under the laws of Hong Kong
Defendant - Appellant: Star Mark Management, Inc., a New York Corporation, Great Mark Corporation, a New York Corporation, John Does 1 Through 10 and others
B & B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 10-3137
Plaintiff - Appellant: B & B Hardware, Inc., a California Corporation
Defendant - Appellee: Hargis Industries, Inc., a Texas Corporation, doing business as Sealtite Building Fasteners, doing business as East Texas Fasteners, East Texas Fasteners, a business entity of form unknown and John Does, 1 through 10, inclusive
Koon Chun Hing Kee Soy & Sauce v. Star Mark Management, Inc.
as 10-652
Plaintiff - Appellee-Cross-Appellant: Koon Chun Hing Kee Soy & Sauce Factory, Ltd., a company organized under the laws of Hong Kong
Defendant: John Does 1 Through 10
Defendant - Appellant-Cross-Appellee: Star Mark Management, Inc., a New York Corporation, Great Mark Corporation, a New York Corporation and Jimmy Zhan, AKA Yi Q. Zhan
Koon Chun Hing Kee Soy & Sauce v. Star Mark Management, Inc.
as 10-483
Plaintiff - Appellee-Cross-Appellant: Koon Chun Hing Kee Soy & Sauce Factory, Ltd., a company organized under the laws of Hong Kong
Defendant: John Does 1 Through 10
Defendant - Appellant-Cross-Appellee: Star Mark Management, Inc., a New York Corporation, Great Mark Corporation, a New York Corporation and Jimmy Zhan, AKA Yi Q. Zhan
MacKay v. Crews
as 10-314
Plaintiff: Reform Party of the United States of America, RPUSA
Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant - Appellant: John Blare, RPUSA Secretary & RPUSA RPCA National Committee Member & Reform Party of California Chair
Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant: Frank MacKay, Independence Party of New York,, IPNY and Michael K. Zumbluskas, RPUSA IPNY National Committee Member & RPUSA Legal Committee Chair
Defendant-Counter-Claimant - Appellee: Beverly Bev Kennedy
Defendant: Karan Kumar Kalotee
Defendant - Appellee: Kay Allison Crews, Charles Foster, David Collison and others
Intervenor - Appellant: Shawn O'Hara
MacKay v. Crews
as 10-293
Plaintiff: Reform Party of the United States of America, RPUSA
Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant - Appellant: John Blare, RPUSA Secretary & RPUSA RPCA National Committee Member & Reform Party of California Chair
Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant: Frank MacKay, Independence Party of New York,, IPNY and Michael K. Zumbluskas, RPUSA IPNY National Committee Member & RPUSA Legal Committee Chair
Defendant-Counter-Claimant - Appellee: Beverly Bev Kennedy
Defendant: Karan Kumar Kalotee
Defendant - Appellee: Kay Allison Crews, Charles Foster, David Collison and others
Intervenor - Appellant: Shawn O'Hara
Hammond v. Nike, Inc. et al
as 1:2009cv10466
Plaintiff: Joe Hammond
Defendant: Nike, Inc., Nike Retail Services, Inc., Foot Locker, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE v. OLYMPIC LIMOUSINE, INC. et al
as 2:2009cv05899
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
Defendant: OLYMPIC LIMOUSINE, INC. and JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Trademark

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?