HemaSource v. Hematerra Technologies et al



 
SummaryLawsuit
Summary
 
Court DocumentsCourt
Documents
 
Docket TextDocket
Text
 
Lawsuit Tracker™Lawsuit
Tracker™
 
Docket TextRelated
Cases
 

Lawsuit Details

RFC Case Number: T-H12-849H
Court Case Number: 2:12-cv-00849-DBP
File Date: Wednesday, September 05, 2012
Plaintiff: HemaSource
Plaintiff Counsel: Margaret N. McGann of Parsons Behle & Latimer
Defendant: Hematerra Technologies
Fenwal
Cause: 15:1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
Court: Utah District Court
Judge: Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead
Notes:

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
9/6/2012 3 NOTICE OF REQUIREMENTS for appearance phv mailed to attorney JOHN F. MORROW, JR, for Plaintiff HemaSource (rls) (Entered: 09/06/2012)
9/6/2012 2 Report on the Filing of an action sent to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Complaint) (rls) (Entered: 09/06/2012)
9/5/2012 1 COMPLAINT against Fenwal, Hematerra Technologies (Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 4681053082), filed by HemaSource. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet 1) Assigned to Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead (rls) (Entered: 09/06/2012)
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 2008-2014 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