Cases 1 - 8 of 8
RMH Tech LLC et al v. PMC Industries, Inc.
as 3:2018cv00543
Plaintiff:
RMH TECH LLC and Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd.
Defendant:
PMC Industries, Inc.
Counter_claimant:
PMC Industries, Inc.
Counter_defendant:
Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd. and RMH TECH LLC
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145
RMH Tech LLC et al v. PMC Industries, Inc.
as 1:2017cv02459
Plaintiff:
RMH Tech LLC and Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd.
Defendant:
PMC Industries, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
RMH Tech LLC et al v. PMC Industries, Inc.
as 1:2016cv01762
Plaintiff:
RMH Tech LLC and Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd.
Defendant:
PMC Industries, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 0101
A F C O Industries Inc v. Metal Roof Innovations Ltd
as 1:2015cv02423
Plaintiff:
A F C O Industries Inc
Defendant:
Metal Roof Innovations Ltd
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
A F C O Industries Inc v. Metal Roof Innovations Ltd
as 1:2015cv01790
Plaintiff:
A F C O Industries Inc
Defendant:
Metal Roof Innovations Ltd
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15
Dynamic Fastener Service, Inc. v. Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd. et al
as 4:2015cv00403
Plaintiff:
Dynamic Fastener Service, Inc.
Defendant:
Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd. , Rob Haddock , Nasello Geheim, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Caught Fish Enterprises, LLC et al v. Action Manufacturing, LLC et al
as 1:2010cv00656
Plaintiff:
Caught Fish Enterprises, LLC , RMH Tech, LLC and Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd.
Defendant:
Action Manufacturing, LLC, Riddel & Company, Inc., Richard A. Riddell and others
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 0101 (35:101 Patent Infringement)
Caught Fish Enterprises, LLC et al v. Blaze Wharton Construction, Inc. et al
as 1:2009cv02878
Plaintiff:
Caught Fish Enterprises, LLC and Metal Roof Innovations, Ltd.
Defendant:
Blaze Wharton Construction, Inc. and Blaze Wharton
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 0101 (35:101 Patent 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.
