comScore, Inc. v. DoubleVerify Inc.
 
SummaryLawsuit
Summary
  
Court DocumentsCourt
Documents
  
Docket TextDocket
Text
  
Lawsuit Tracker™Lawsuit
Tracker™
  
Docket TextRelated
Cases
  

Lawsuit Details
RFC Case Number: P-C12-396D
Court Case Number: 2:12-cv-00396-AWA-TEM
File Date: Friday, July 20, 2012
Plaintiff: comScore, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Stephen A. Cobb, Craig J. Franco of Odin Feldman & Pittleman PC
Seth H. Ostrow, Matthew L. Kaufman, Dev Batta of Ostrow Kaufman LLP
Defendant: DoubleVerify Inc.
Cause: 35:271 Patent Infringement
Court: Virginia Eastern District Court
Judge: District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Tommy E. Miller
Notes:
Patent Details:
Patent Information Available To Active Paid Subscribers Only
Already have an account? Login Now
Need an account? Register for a Free Trial



Docket Text
This may not be the most complete up-to-date docket information.
For daily updates on this case, sign-up for a Lawsuit Tracker.
See the box on the right side of this page for details on the Lawsuit Tracker


Date # Docket Text
7/20/2012 1 COMPLAINT against DoubleVerify Inc. ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 14683030116.), filed by comScore, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Letter, # 3 Receipt, # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit.....)(ldab, ) (Entered: 07/27/2012)
Need more info about this lawsuit?
Court Documents Instantly access recently filed official court documents
Docket Text Review activity within the case
Lawsuit Tracker™ Get automatic notifications of any new information about this case.
Related Cases Review similar cases found across multiple criteria


IP Lawfirms & Attorneys

Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP Info




Home   |   About   |   Lawsuits   |   Register   |   Login   |   Terms of Use   |   Privacy Policy   |   Sitemap   |   RSS Feed   |   Contact

© Copyright 2008-2013 RFC Express — All Rights Reserved — Presented By Intellectual Property Today

RFC Express provides access to public lawsuit filings retrieved from the U.S. Federal District Courts.
These lawsuits, and associated information should not be considered findings of fact or liability. Nor do they reflect the views of RFC Express or any of its employees.
extended validation certificate