Canon, USA, Inc. v. Natalia Campbell

Court DocumentsCourt
Docket TextDocket
Lawsuit Tracker™Lawsuit
Docket TextRelated

Lawsuit Details

RFC Case Number: T-C08-124N
Court Case Number: 1:08-cv-00124-RFC-CSO
File Date: Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Plaintiff: Canon, USA, Inc.
Plaintiff Counsel: Rodd A. Hamman of Calton, Hamman & Wolff, PC
Defendant: Natalia Campbell
Cause: 15:44 Trademark Infringement
Court: Montana District Court
Judge: Judge Richard F. Cebull
Referred To: Magistrate Carolyn S Ostby

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
12/2/2008 3 MOTION by Attorney for Leave to File Conventionally in This Case, Rodd A. Hamman appearing for Plaintiff Canon, USA, Inc. Motions referred to Carolyn S Ostby. (JDH) (Entered: 12/02/2008)
12/2/2008 2 NOTICE Of Conventional Filing of Documents by Canon, USA, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 LODGED Final Consent Judgment) (JDH) (Entered: 12/02/2008)
12/2/2008 1 COMPLAINT against Natalia Campbell (Filing fee $ 350 receipt number MTX100002464.), filed by Canon, USA, Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet) (JDH) (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/2/2008: # 2 Petitioner's Exhibit 1) (JDH, ). (Entered: 12/02/2008)
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

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

© Copyright 2008-2015 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