Michael Stokes v. Gold Productions, Inc., d/b/a Girls Night Out The Show | |||||||
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma copyright infringement lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a copyright infringement theory under 17 U.S.C. 501. |
|||||||
Evofem Biosciences, Inc. v. Padagis Israel Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. | |||||||
Newark, New Jersey intellectual property litigation lawyer represented the Plaintiff, who sued the Defendants on patent infringement theories. |
|||||||
DP Creations v. Frank Li, d/b/a "Dollbie" | |||||||
Salt Lake City, Utah intellectual property lawyers represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a copyright infringement theory. |
|||||||
Jose Ruiz v. Paramount Global, Inc. | |||||||
New York City, New York intellectual property lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a copyright infringement theory. |
|||||||
Ajay Suresh v. Koyfin, Inc. and Rob Boris Koyfman | |||||||
New York, New York intellectual property lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a copyright infringement theory. |
|||||||
James Messerschmidt v. EE Bar, LLC | |||||||
New York City, New York intellectual property lawyers represented Plaintiff that sued Defendant on a copyright infringement theory.... More... $0 (08-04-2023 - NY) |
|||||||
Dawn Cutillo, et al. v. David Cutillo, et al. | |||||||
Allentown, Pennsylvania intellectual property lawyer represented Plaintiffs who sued Defendants on copyright infringement theories. |
|||||||
Laurie Rubin v. Trendland, L.L.C. | |||||||
New York City, New York intellectual property lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a copyright infringement theory in violation of 17 U.S.C. 501, which provides: |
|||||||
John Kraljevich v. Courser Athletics, Inc. | |||||||
Boston, Massachusetts intellectual property lawyers represented Plaintiff who sued Defendants on copyright infringement theories. |
|||||||
Veranique Payton and Felton Payton, Jr. v. National Continental Insurance Company | |||||||
New Orleans, Louisiana personal injury car wreck lawyer represented Plaintiffs who sued Defendant in an auto insurance liability theory. |
|||||||
Nathan Hansen v. Windsong Ranch Community Association, Inc. et al. | |||||||
Sherman, Texas personal injury lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a negligence theory. |
|||||||
Eagle View Technologies, Inc. and Pictometry Internsational Corp. v. Nearmap, U.S., Inc.; Nearmap Austrial Pty, Ltd.; and Nearmap, Ltd. | |||||||
Salt Lake City, Utah intellectual property law lawyers represented Plaintiff and Defendant in patent infringement throries. |
|||||||
B.E. Technology, LLC v. Twitter, Inc. and Google, LLC | |||||||
Wilmington, Delaware patent infringement lawyer represented Plaintiff, which sued Defendants claiming that they were violating "United States Patent Nos, 8,549,410 (“the '410 patent”), 8,549,411 (“the '411 patent”), and 8,769,440 (“the '440 patent”) (collectively “the Asserted Patents”). D.1.1. All of the /Asserted Patents expired in 2018. D.I. 67 at 2. |
|||||||
Christopher Sadowski v. Impcto Latin New,s Inc., d/b/a Impacto Latino | |||||||
New York City, New York intellectual property lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendant on a copyright infringement theory. |
|||||||
Kathryn Townsend Griffin, et al. v. Edward Christopher Sheeran a/k/a "Ed Sheeran," et al. | |||||||
New York, New York civil litigation lawyers represented plaintiffs who sued Defendants on copyright infringement theories under 17 U.S.C. 101. |
|||||||
Noah Lebowitz v. Harmoney Nutraceuticals, LLC | |||||||
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma intellectual property lawyers represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a trademark infringement theory under 15 U.S.C. 1114, which provides: |
|||||||
Bobby Nunn v. NFL Enterprises, LLC | |||||||
New York City, New York intellectual property lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a copyright infringement law theory. |
|||||||
Danny Lamont Chambers; Dontell Rayvon-Eddie Smith v. Ronald Sanders; City of Detroit, Michigan | |||||||
Danny Lamont Chambers and Dontell Rayvon-Eddie Smith allege that Detective Ronald Sanders and his employer, the City of Detroit, violated their Fourteenth Amendment right to familial integrity by procuring the wrongful |
|||||||
Just Between Friends Franchise System, Inc. v. Samone Gibson Enterprises, LLC et al | |||||||
Tulsa, Oklahoma intellectual property lawyers represented Plaintiff which sued Defendant on a trademark infringement theory. |
|||||||
Denise Trlica, et al. v. Entertainment Tonite, L.C. | |||||||
Davenport, Iowa Lanham Act lawyers represented Plaintiffs who sued Defendant on Trademark Infringement Act violation theories claiming $940,000 in damages. |
|||||||
Emelike Nwosuocha v. Donald McKinely Glover, II | |||||||
New York, New York intellectual property lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a copyright infringement theory.... More... $0 (03-24-2023 - NY) |
|||||||
Brave Law Firm, LLC v. Truck Accident Lawyers Group, Inc. | |||||||
Wichita, Kansas intellectual property lawyer represented Plaintiff which sued defendant on a trademark infringement (Lanham Act) violation theory.
|