Create accountLogin

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
mastodon.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
The original server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit

Administered by:

Server stats:

379K
active users

mastodon.social: AboutStatusProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.4.0-nightly.2025-03-07

Public
Sarah Fackrell (Burstein)

First thing that caught my eye: This case was filed in EDVA.

Second thing that caught my eye: It was filed by Sterne Kessler.

scribd.com/document/652387507/

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division XYZ CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. THE UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATIONS IDENTIFIED IN SCHEDULE A, Defendants. VERIFIED COMPLAINT Plaintiff (“Plaintiff” or ), by counsel, alleges as follows for its Verified Complaint against the Defendant Unincorporated Associations identified in Schedule A (collectively “Defendants”).1
Date: May 23, 2023 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Monica Riva Talley Monica Riva Talley (VSB No. 41840) Nicholas J. Nowak (pro hac pending) STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. 1100 New York Ave., NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20005-3934 Telephone No.: (202) 371-2600 Facsimile No.: (202) 371-2540 mtalley@sternekessler.com nnowak@sternekessler.com Attorneys for Plaintiff
#Trademarks#UtilityPatents
Public
Sarah Fackrell (Burstein)

The complaint alleges trademark infringement (including, apparently, actual counterfeiting) as well as utility patent infringement.

How do I know it's a utility patent when they've hidden the patent number? Well, design patent claims aren't this long:

COUNT ill - INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. -( 35 u.s.c. § 271) 61. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set fo11h in paragraphs 1 through 60. 62. The -patent is directed toward Exemplary Claim 1 of the patent recites: -- 23 24 63. Defendants, as specified in column 5 of Schedule A, have induced infringement and continue to induce direct infringement, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, of at least claim 1 of the patent by making, using, offering to sell, selling, or importing the Counterfeit Devices in the United States and by encouraging, promoting, and instructing customers to use at least these devices in a manner that directly infringes at least claim 1 of the patent. 64. Defendants have and continue to encourage, promote, and instruct customers to perform the preamble of claim 1 of the patent, which recites ” The product listing pages for the Counterfeit Devices encourage, promote, or instruct customers to use the devices in a manner that For example, many of the product listings incorporate the following image, or a similar variation thereof, that promotes the use of
Sarah Fackrell (Burstein)

Update: The judge granted one motion to extend the TRO but just denied the second one because "[n]either of Plaintiff's briefs contain any authority regarding the Court's ability to extend a TRO that has already expired."

storage.courtlistener.com/reca

(h/t @hewittlaw)

"Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(2) states that a TRO "may be extended provided a party can shov/, prior to expiration of the order, good cause for such an extension." Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(b)(2) (emphasis added). As stated, Plaintiff filed the second Motion to Extend after the close of business on July 6, 2023. Thus, the TRO had already expired at the time that Plaintiff moved the Court for a second extension. Neither of Plaintiff s briefs contain any authority regarding the Court's ability to extend a TRO that has already expired. Dkts. 65, 69. Therefore, upon consideration of Plaintiff s Motion and for lack of good cause shown, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiffs Ex Parte Motion to Extend the TRO (Dkt. 59) is DENIED."
Jul 27, 2023, 03:51 PM·Public·Web
0boosts·2favorites
ExploreLive feeds
About