Michael Berry et al v. John Doe 1 et al



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

Lawsuit Details

RFC Case Number: C-M09-6746J
Court Case Number: 2:09-cv-06746-GHK-FFM
File Date: Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Plaintiff: Michael Berry
Ian Gerada
Okorie Okorocha
Plaintiff Counsel: Okorie Okorocha of California Legal Team
Defendant: John Doe 1
John Doe 2
John Doe 3
John Doe 4
John Doe 5
John Doe 6
Doe Entity 1
Doe Entity 2
Doe Entity 3
Cause: 28:1338 Copyright Infringement
Court: California Central District Court
Judge: Judge George H. King
Referred To: Magistrate Judge Frederick F. Mumm
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
3/16/2010 8 REPORT ON THE DETERMINATION OF AN ACTION Regarding a Copyright. (Closing). (jp) (Entered: 03/16/2010)
3/16/2010 7 MINUTES: Proceedings: ORDER OF DISMISSAL by Judge George H. King: Having considered all relevant factors, including any available lessor sanctions, we conclude that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate in this case. Accordingly, the above-entitled action is hereby DISMISSED in its entirety without prejudice for plaintiff's failure to diligently prosecute, and for his failure to comply with our order. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp) (Entered: 03/16/2010)
1/19/2010 6 MINUTES: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE; On September 16, 2009, plaintiffs filed this action against various DOE defendants and DOE entitieswithout actually naming any defendant. To date, plaintiffs have taken no action in this case. They have not amended the complaint to name actual individuals or entities, and have not filed any proof of service on any defendant. Because more than 120 days have elapsed since the filing of this complaint, plaintiffs are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing by no later than February 2, 2010 why this action should not be dismissed for plaintiffs failure to timely effect service of process. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). Failure to timely and adequately show cause as required herein shall be deemed plaintiffs abandonment of this action. In that event, this action will be dismissed for plaintiffs failure to diligently prosecute, and for their failure to comply with this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED by Judge George H. King. (ir) (Entered: 01/20/2010)
1/4/2010 5 NOTICE OF DISCREPANCY AND ORDER: by Judge George H. King, ORDERING Motion of Doe 1 to Quash submitted by Defendant Doe Entity 1 received on 12/16/09 is not to be filed but instead rejected. Denial based on: no named defendant. (es) (Entered: 01/06/2010)
9/29/2009 4 ORDER by Judge George H. King Re: Case Management (Revised as of January 2008) Read Immediately. (mg) (Entered: 09/29/2009)
9/16/2009 3 REPORT ON THE FILING OF AN ACTION regarding a copyright (Initial Notification) filed by Michael Berry, Ian Gerada, Okorie Okorocha. (ghap) (Entered: 09/21/2009)
9/16/2009 2 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs Michael Berry, Ian Gerada, Okorie Okorocha. (ghap) (ds). (Entered: 09/21/2009)
9/16/2009 2 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs Michael Berry, Ian Gerada, Okorie Okorocha. (ghap) (Entered: 09/21/2009)
9/16/2009 1 COMPLAINT against Defendants John Doe 6, Doe Entity 1, Doe Entity 2, Doe Entity 3, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, John Doe 4, John Doe 5. (Filing fee $ 350: FEE PAID.) Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiffs Michael Berry, Ian Gerada, Okorie Okorocha.(ghap) (ds). (Entered: 09/21/2009)
9/16/2009 1 COMPLAINT against Defendants John Doe 6, Doe Entity 1, Doe Entity 2, Doe Entity 3, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, John Doe 4, John Doe 5. (Filing fee $ 350: FEE PAID.) Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiffs Michael Berry, Ian Gerada, Okorie Okorocha.(ghap) (Entered: 09/21/2009)
9/16/2009 20 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery) 1 as to Defendants John Doe 6, Doe Entity 1, Doe Entity 2, Doe Entity 3, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, John Doe 4, John Doe 5. (ghap) (Entered: 09/21/2009)
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