Implus Footcare, LLC v. Hickory Brands, Inc.

Court DocumentsCourt
Docket TextDocket
Lawsuit Tracker™Lawsuit
Docket TextRelated

Lawsuit Details

RFC Case Number: T-I12-290H
Court Case Number: 1:12-cv-00290-UA-JEP
File Date: Friday, March 23, 2012
Plaintiff: Implus Footcare, LLC
Plaintiff Counsel: A. Graham Shirley of Shirley & Adams PLLC
Defendant: Hickory Brands, Inc.
Cause: 15:44 Trademark Infringement
Court: North Carolina Middle District Court
Judge: Referred To: Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake

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
3/26/2012 Case Assigned to UNASSIGNED and MAG/JUDGE JOI ELIZABETH PEAKE. (Sheets, Jamie) (Entered: 03/26/2012)
3/26/2012 CASE REFERRED to Standing Order 30. (Sheets, Jamie) (Entered: 03/26/2012)
3/23/2012 3 Notice of Right to Consent. Counsel shall serve the attached form on all parties. (Sheets, Jamie) (Entered: 03/23/2012)
3/23/2012 2 Summons Issued as to HICKORY BRANDS, INC. (Sheets, Jamie) (Entered: 03/23/2012)
3/23/2012 1
3/23/2012 CASE REFERRED to Mediation pursuant to Local Rule 83.9b of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of this Court. Please go to our website form directory for a list of mediators which must be served on all parties. (Sheets, Jamie) (Entered: 03/23/2012)
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

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