• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
5 results

City of New York v. Magellan Technology, Inc. et al

Docket 1:23-cv-05880, New York Southern District Court (July 10, 2023)
Judge Louis L. Stanton, presiding
Statutory Actions - Other
DivisionFoley Square
FlagsECF
Cause18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Case Type890 Statutory Actions - Other
Tags890 Statutory Actions, Other, 890 Statutory Actions, Other
Plaintiff City of New York
Defendant Ecto World LLC
Defendant Magellan Technology Inc
...
cite Cite Docket

No. 138 STIPULATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the ...

Document City of New York v. Magellan Technology, Inc. et al, 1:23-cv-05880, No. 138 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 4, 2024)
Motion for Protective Order
The designation of any material as Confidential Information or as Attorneys' Eyes Only shall apply with equal force to any copies, abstracts, or summaries made thereof, or excerpts taken therefrom.
the Court, as provided in paragraph 13, including Court personnel, potential jurors, jurors and/or alternates (at any trial or hearing); b) Named parties, or officers, directors, and employees of such parties who are reasonably necessary to assist counsel in this case; c) In-house counsel for the parties and counsel of record in this matter, including contract attorneys, paralegals, clerical, and secretarial staff employed by such counsel as necessary for the prosecution or defense of this action and for preparation for trial; d) court reporters, videographers, and any outside duplicating or document management company retained by any Party to this action; e) persons noticed for depositions, or designated as trial witnesses, or potential witnesses and their counsel, to the extent reasonably necessary in connection with their testimony ( or potential testimony) or in preparation therefor; f) outside consultants or experts retained at any time by counsel in connection with this litigation as a consulting or testifying expert pursuant to Rule 26(b )( 4), Fed, R. Civ, P., and who reasonably require access to the particular Confidential Information for purposes of assisting them in this Litigation; and g) any other person that the Parties agree to in writing.
Documents, material, or information designated as Attorneys ' Eyes Only may be disclosed or made available by a Receiving Party only to the following: a) Counsel of record in this matter, including contract attorneys, paralegals, clerical, and secretarial staff employed by such counsel as necessary for the prosecution or defense of this action and for preparation for trial; b) the Court, as provided in paragraph 14, including Court personnel, potential jurors, jurors and/or alternates (at any trial or hearing); c) court reporters, videographers, and any outside duplicating or document management company retained by any Party to this action; and d) any other person that the Parties agree to in writing.
Prior to the disclosure of any Confidential Information or information designated as Attorneys' Eyes Only to any person designated in paragraph 5(e)-(g) or 6(a)-(d), such person must first agree to be bound by the terms of this Order by signing the Acknowledgment attached as Exhibit A or, in the case of a deposition witness who has not previously signed an Acknowledgment, by agreeing on the record to be bound by the terms of this Order.
Counsel shall retain copies of each signed Acknowledgment during the course of this litigation until terminated by a final non-appealable judgment or settlement.
cite Cite Document

No. 103 OPINION & ORDER granting in part and denying in part 52 Motion to Dismiss; granting 54 Motion ...

Document City of New York v. Magellan Technology, Inc. et al, 1:23-cv-05880, No. 103 (S.D.N.Y. May. 24, 2024)
Motion to Dismiss (Demurrer)Partial
The City alleges that none of the defendants reported the sales to New York State, the New York City Department of Finance, nor the Corporation Counsel of New York City, as required under federal law.
As to the other alleged violations, the Amended Complaint alleges the following: the Hyde and Empire defendants violate the PACT Act because (1) "in none of their delivery sales of FDVs to consumers did Magellan, Demand Vape, Empire Vape, or Star Vape identify the package 22 Case 1:23-cv-05880-LLS Document 103 Filed 05/24/24 Page 23 of 40 contents on the outside of the ...
cite Cite Document

No. 20 AMENDED COMPLAINT amending 16 Amended Complaint, against Dorbes LLC, Ecto World LLC, Matthew ...

Document City of New York v. Magellan Technology, Inc. et al, 1:23-cv-05880, No. 20 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 17, 2023)
Complaint
None of the FDVs sold by defendants qualify as such.
Magellan, Demand Vape, Empire Vape, Star Vape and/or Dorbes each violate the PACT Act because in none of their delivery sales of FDVs to consumers did Magellan, Demand Vape, Empire Vape, or Star Vape identify the package ...
Magellan, Demand Vape, Empire Vape, Star Vape, and/or Dorbes each violate the PACT Act because in none of their delivery sales of FDVs to consumers did Magellan, - 34 - Case 1:23-cv-05880-LLS Document 20 Filed 08/17/23 Page ...
cite Cite Document

No. 1 COMPLAINT against Ecto World LLC, Matthew L Glauser, Donald Hashagen, Devang Koya, MAHANT KRUPA ...

Document City of New York v. Magellan Technology, Inc. et al, 1:23-cv-05880, No. 1 (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 10, 2023)
Complaint
None of the FDVs sold by defendants qualify as such.
Magellan, Demand Vape, Empire Vape, and/or Star Vape each violate the PACT Act because in none of their delivery sales of FDVs to consumers did Magellan, Demand Vape, Empire Vape, or Star Vape identify the package contents on ...
Magellan, Demand Vape, Empire Vape, and/or Star Vape each violate the PACT Act because in none of their delivery sales of FDVs to consumers did Magellan, Demand Vape, Empire Vape, or Star Vape utilize a method of delivery ...
cite Cite Document