Judge 
Party 
Law Firm EscapeX IP LLC v. Block, Inc.
1:22-cv-03575 | New York Southern District Court
Interested in this case?
Request a Demo Track this case, and find millions of cases like it, let us show you how.
Division
Foley Square
Judge
Judge Jesse M. Furman
Filed
May 3, 2022
Terminated
Jan. 25, 2023
Case Flags
CLOSED,
ECF,
and
MEDTFR4
Nature of Suit
830 Patent
Cause
18:1341 Patent Infringement
Jury Demand
Plaintiff
Last Updated: 1 year, 3 months ago
Show Interactive Timeline
| Filing Date | # | Docket Text |
|---|---|---|
| 3/22/2023 | 40 | MEMO ENDORSEMENT withdrawing 32 Motion for Attorney Fees; granting 39 Motion to Withdraw 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285., 39 MOTION to Withdraw 33 Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion, 34 Declaration in Support of Motion, 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. . ENDORSEMENT: Application GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF Nos. 32 and 39. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/22/2023) (tg) (Entered: 03/22/2023) |
| 3/21/2023 | 39 | MOTION to Withdraw 33 Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion, 34 Declaration in Support of Motion, 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. . Document filed by Block, Inc...(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 03/21/2023) |
| 3/16/2023 | 38 | ORDER granting 37 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 37 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from David J. Hoffman dated 3/15/2023., 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. This is Plaintiff's counsel's second such failure to comply with the Court's Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, see id. Paragraph 2.E (requiring that, absent an emergency, motions for extensions be made "at least 48 hours prior to the deadline"), which alone would warrant denial of this application. See also ECF No. 35 (Plaintiff's counsel requesting an extension on the day of the deadline). Nevertheless, the application is GRANTED. Defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed within seven days of Plaintiff's opposition brief. Absent an emergency, further extensions will not be granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 37. SO ORDERED. Responses due by 3/22/2023. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/16/2023) (tg) (Entered: 03/16/2023) |
| 3/15/2023 | 37 | LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from David J. Hoffman dated 3/15/2023. Document filed by EscapeX IP LLC..(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 03/15/2023) |
| 2/22/2023 | 36 | ORDER granting 35 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re 35 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from David J. Hoffman dated 2/22/2023. Application GRANTED. Defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed within seven days of Plaintiff's opposition brief. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 35. SO ORDERED. Responses due by 3/15/2023 (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/22/2023) (jca) (Entered: 02/22/2023) |
| 2/22/2023 | 35 | LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from David J. Hoffman dated 2/22/2023. Document filed by EscapeX IP LLC..(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 02/22/2023) |
| 2/8/2023 | 34 | DECLARATION of Daniel S. Block in Support re: 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285.. Document filed by Block, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3 (Part 1 of 4), # 4 Exhibit 3 (Part 2 of 4), # 5 Exhibit 3 (Part 3 of 4), # 6 Exhibit 3 (Part 4 of 4), # 7 Exhibit 4, # 8 Exhibit 5, # 9 Exhibit 6, # 10 Exhibit 7, # 11 Exhibit 8, # 12 Exhibit 9, # 13 Exhibit 10, # 14 Exhibit 11, # 15 Exhibit 12).(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 02/08/2023) |
| 2/8/2023 | 33 | MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 32 MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. . Document filed by Block, Inc...(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 02/08/2023) |
| 2/8/2023 | 32 | MOTION for Attorney Fees Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 285. Document filed by Block, Inc...(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 02/08/2023) |
| 1/25/2023 | 31 | CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 30 Memorandum & Opinion in favor of Block, Inc. against EscapeX IP LLC. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated January 24, 2023, the '113 Patent's claims are directed to an abstract idea and thus not eligible for patent protection. Accordingly, Block's motion to dismiss must be and is GRANTED, and the First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED. Although leave to amend should be freely given "when justice so requires," Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2), it is "within the sound discretion of the district court to grant or deny leave to amend," Broidy Cap. Mgmt. LLC v. Benomar, 944 F.3d 436, 447 (2d Cir. 2019). Here, the problem with EscapeX's claims is substantive, so amendment would be futile. See, e.g., Roundtree v. NYC, No. 19-CV-2475 (JMF), 2021 WL 1667193, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 28, 2021) (citing cases); Ghaly Devices, 443 F. Supp. 3d at 434 (denying leave to replead where patent claims were found ineligible). Moreover, EscapeX does not seek leave to amend or suggest that it is in possession of facts that would cure the problems with its claims. See, e.g., Clark v. Kitt, No. 12-CV-8061 (CS), 2014 WL 4054284, at *15 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2014) ("A plaintiff need not be given leave to amend if [it] fails to specify how amendment would cure the pleading deficiencies in [its] complaint."); accord TechnoMarine SA v. Giftports, Inc., 758 F.3d 493, 505-06 (2d Cir. 2014). Finally, the Court granted EscapeX leave to amend in response to Block's first motion to dismiss and explicitly warned that it would "not be given any further opportunity to amend the complaint to address issues raised by the motion to dismiss." ECF No. 31; see, e.g., Transeo S.A.R.L. v. Bessemer Venture Partners VI L.P., 936 F. Supp. 2d 376, 415 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) ("Plaintiff's failure to fix deficiencies in its previous pleadings is alone sufficient ground to deny leave to amend sua sponte." (citing cases)). Accordingly, the Court declines to sua sponte grant EscapeX leave to amend. See Guvera IP Pty Ltd., 2022 WL 4537999, a t *8 (denying leave to amend in nearly identical circumstances). Judgment is entered in favor of Block; accordingly, the case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 1/25/2023) (Attachments: # 1 Right to Appeal) (km) (Entered: 01/25/2023) |
| 1/24/2023 | 30 | OPINION AND ORDER re: 19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to Claim Patentable Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. filed by Block, Inc. For the foregoing reasons, the '113 Patent's claims are directed to an abstract idea and thus not eligible for patent protection. Accordingly, Block's motion to dismiss must be and is GRANTED, and the First Amended Complaint is DISMISSED. Although leave to amend should be freely given "when justice so requires," Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2), it is "within the sound discretion of the district court to grant or deny leave to amend," Broidy Cap. Mgmt. LLC v. Benomar, 944 F.3d 436, 447 (2d Cir. 2019). Here, the problem with EscapeX's claims is substantive, so amendment would be futile. See, e.g., Roundtree v. NYC, No. 19-CV-2475 (JMF), 2021 WL 1667193, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 28, 2021) (citing cases); Ghaly Devices, 443 F. Supp. 3d at 434 (denying leave to replead where patent claims were found ineligible). Moreover, EscapeX does not seek leave to amend or suggest that it is in possession of facts that would cure the problems with its claims. See, e.g., Clark v. Kitt, No. 12-CV-8061 (CS), 2014 WL 4054284, at *15 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2014) ("A plaintiff need not be given leave to amend if [it] fails to specify how amendment would cure the pleading deficiencies in [its] complaint."); accord TechnoMarine SA v. Giftports, Inc., 758 F.3d 493, 505-06 (2d Cir. 2014). Finally, the Court granted EscapeX leave to amend in response to Block's first motion to dismiss and explicitly warned that it would "not be given any further opportunity to amend the complaint to address issues raised by the motion to dismiss." ECF No. 31; see, e.g., Transeo S.A.R.L. v. Bessemer Venture Partners VI L.P., 936 F. Supp. 2d 376, 415 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) ("Plaintiff's failure to fix deficiencies in its previous pleadings is alone sufficient ground to deny leave to amend sua sponte." (citing cases)). Accordingly, the Court declines to sua sponte grant EscapeX leave to amend. See Guvera IP Pty Ltd., 2022 WL 4537999, at *8 (denying leave to amend in nearly identical circumstances). The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 19, to enter judgment in favor of Block, and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/24/23) (yv) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing. (Entered: 01/24/2023) |
| 1/6/2023 | 28 | SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF re: 19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to Claim Patentable Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. . Document filed by EscapeX IP LLC..(Ramey, William) (Entered: 01/06/2023) |
| 1/6/2023 | 27 | BRIEF re: 26 Order, (Block's Supplemental Brief Addressing Impact of this Court's decision in Guvera IP Pty Ltd. v. Spotify, Inc.). Document filed by Block, Inc...(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 01/06/2023) |
| 12/21/2022 | 26 | ORDER: The parties are directed to submit supplement briefs, not to exceed five pages each, by January 6, 2023, addressing the impact, if any, of this Courts decision in Guvera IP Pty Ltd. v. Spotify, Inc., No. 21-CV-4544 (JMF), 2022 WL 4537999 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2022). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/21/2022) (ama) (Entered: 12/21/2022) |
| 12/15/2022 | Minute Entry for proceedings held before SDNY Mediation: Mediation Conference held on 12/15/2022. Mediation Status due by 1/17/2023. (mnp) (Entered: 12/30/2022) | |
| 11/29/2022 | FIRST MEDIATION CONFERENCE. Mediation Conference scheduled for 12/15/2022 at 09:00 AM in telephone or video conference.(mnp) (Entered: 11/29/2022) | |
| 9/22/2022 | NOTICE OF MEDIATOR ASSIGNMENT - Notice of assignment of mediator. Mediator Schedule due by 10/24/2022.(ah) (Entered: 09/22/2022) | |
| 9/7/2022 | 25 | MEDIATION REFERRAL ORDER: In the Court's view, the parties should participate in mediation through the Court annexed mediation program prior to a decision on the motion mindful of the time it will take the Court to decide the motion and the time and expense involved in any litigation that would, if applicable, follow the Court's decision. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this case is referred for mediation to the Mediation Program. If any party objects to that referral, it shall file a letter explaining its objection within three business days of this Order. The parties are hereby notified that Local Rule 83.9 shall govern the mediation and are directed to participate in the mediation in good faith. The mediation will have no effect upon any scheduling Order issued by this Court without leave of this Court. SO ORDERED. Please reference the following when corresponding with the Mediation Office. E-mail MediationOffice@nysd.uscourts.gov, telephone (212) 805-0643, and facsimile (212) 805-0647. Mediator to be Assigned by 9/21/2022. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 9/7/2022) (ks) (Entered: 09/07/2022) |
| 9/2/2022 | 24 | REPLY to Response to Motion re: 19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to Claim Patentable Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. . Document filed by Block, Inc...(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 09/02/2022) |
| 8/26/2022 | 23 | RESPONSE to Motion re: 19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to Claim Patentable Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. . Document filed by EscapeX IP LLC..(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 08/26/2022) |
| 8/8/2022 | 22 | ORDER: Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file any amended complaint by August 26, 2022. Plaintiff will not be given any further opportunity to amend the complaint to address issues raised by the motion to dismiss. If Plaintiff does amend, by three (3) weeks after the amended complaint is filed, Defendant shall: (1) file an answer; (2) file a new motion to dismiss; or (3) file a letter on ECF stating that it relies on the previously filed motion to dismiss. If Defendant files an answer or a new motion to dismiss, the Court will deny the previously filed motion to dismiss as moot. If Defendant files a new motion to dismiss, any opposition shall be filed within fourteen days, and any reply shall be filed within seven days of any opposition. If no amended complaint is filed, Plaintiff shall file any opposition to the motion todismiss by August 26, 2022. Defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed by September 2, 2022. Finally, it is further ORDERED that the initial pretrial conference previously scheduled for August 17, 2022, is adjourned sine die. SO ORDERED., ( Amended Pleadings due by 8/26/2022., Responses due by 8/26/2022, Replies due by 9/2/2022.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 8/08/2022) (ama) (Entered: 08/08/2022) |
| 8/5/2022 | 21 | DECLARATION of Daniel S. Block in Support re: 19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to Claim Patentable Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. § 101.. Document filed by Block, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C).(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 08/05/2022) |
| 8/5/2022 | 20 | MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 19 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to Claim Patentable Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. . Document filed by Block, Inc...(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 08/05/2022) |
| 8/5/2022 | 19 | MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to Claim Patentable Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Document filed by Block, Inc.. Responses due by 8/19/2022.(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 08/05/2022) |
| 6/6/2022 | 18 | ORDER granting 16 Motion for William Hugh Milliken to Appear Pro Hac Vice (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Jesse M. Furman)(Text Only Order) (Furman, Jesse) (Entered: 06/06/2022) |
| 6/6/2022 | >>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. 16 MOTION for William Hugh Milliken to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (sgz) (Entered: 06/06/2022) | |
| 6/3/2022 | 17 | ORDER granting 15 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re: 9 Amended Complaint addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from Daniel S. Block dated June 2, 2022. Application GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 15. SO ORDERED. 9 Amended Complaint. Block, Inc. answer due 8/5/2022. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/3/2022) (vfr) (Entered: 06/03/2022) |
| 6/3/2022 | 16 | MOTION for William Hugh Milliken to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Block, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit ISO Motion for Pro Hac Vice, # 2 Exhibit A, DC Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Exhibit B, Tennessee Certificate of Good Standing, # 4 Text of Proposed Order Pro Hac Vice).(Milliken, William) (Entered: 06/03/2022) |
| 6/2/2022 | 15 | LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re: 9 Amended Complaint addressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from Daniel S. Block dated June 2, 2022. Document filed by Block, Inc...(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 06/02/2022) |
| 6/2/2022 | 14 | RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. No Corporate Parent. Document filed by Block, Inc...(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 06/02/2022) |
| 5/27/2022 | 13 | ORDER granting 12 Motion for Daniel S. Block to Appear Pro Hac Vice (HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Jesse M. Furman)(Text Only Order) (Furman, Jesse) (Entered: 05/27/2022) |
| 5/27/2022 | >>>NOTICE REGARDING PRO HAC VICE MOTION. Regarding Document No. 12 AMENDED MOTION for Daniel S. Block to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff.. The document has been reviewed and there are no deficiencies. (sgz) (Entered: 05/27/2022) | |
| 5/26/2022 | 12 | AMENDED MOTION for Daniel S. Block to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Block, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Daniel S. Block, # 2 Exhibit A - DC Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Exhibit B - PA Certificate of Good Standing, # 4 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order).(Block, Daniel) (Entered: 05/26/2022) |
| 5/26/2022 | >>>NOTICE REGARDING DEFICIENT MOTION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE. Notice to RE-FILE Document No. 10 MOTION for Daniel S. Block to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-26196244. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff... The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): expired Certificate of Good Standing from District of Columbia Court of Appeals;. Re-file the motion as a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice - attach the correct signed PDF - select the correct named filer/filers - attach valid Certificates of Good Standing issued within the past 30 days - attach Proposed Order. (sgz) (Entered: 05/26/2022) | |
| 5/25/2022 | 11 | NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Chandrika Vira on behalf of Block, Inc...(Vira, Chandrika) (Entered: 05/25/2022) |
| 5/25/2022 | 10 | FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT DOCKET ENTRY - MOTION for Daniel S. Block to Appear Pro Hac Vice . Filing fee $ 200.00, receipt number ANYSDC-26196244. Motion and supporting papers to be reviewed by Clerk's Office staff. Document filed by Block, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Daniel S. Block, # 2 Exhibit A - DC Certificate of Good Standing, # 3 Errata B - PA Certificate of Good Standing, # 4 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order).(Block, Daniel) Modified on 5/26/2022 (sgz). (Entered: 05/25/2022) |
| 5/23/2022 | 9 | FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT amending 1 Complaint against Block, Inc. with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by EscapeX IP LLC. Related document: 1 Complaint. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Claim Charts, # 2 Exhibit US9009113).(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 05/23/2022) |
| 5/11/2022 | 8 | SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED. Block, Inc. served on 5/10/2022, answer due 5/31/2022. Service was accepted by Amy McLaren, Managing Agent. Document filed by EscapeX IP LLC..(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 05/11/2022) |
| 5/6/2022 | 7 | NOTICE OF INITIAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE: It is hereby ORDERED that counsel for all parties appear for an initial pretrial conference with the Court on August 17, 2022, at 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 1105 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Centre Street, New York, New York. All counsel are required to register promptly as filing users on ECF and to familiarize themselves with the SDNY ECF Rules & Instructions, which are available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/electronic-case-filing. All counsel must also familiarize themselves with the Court's Individual Rules, which are available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-jesse-m-furman. Absent leave of Court obtained by letter-motion filed before the conference, all pretrial conferences must be attended by the attorney who will serve as principal trial counsel. Additionally, in accordance with Paragraph 2.D of the Court's Individual Rules and Practices, the parties are hereby ORDERED to file on ECF a joint letter, described below, as well as a proposed Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order attached as an exhibit to the joint letter, no later than Thursday of the week prior to the initial pretrial conference. The parties shall use this Court's form Proposed Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order, which is also available at https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-jesse-m-furman. Any open legal issues can be addressed at the conference. The joint letter shall not exceed five (5) pages, and shall provide the following information in separate paragraphs as further set forth in this Order. Counsel who have entered a notice of appearance as of the issuance of this order are directed (1) to notify counsel for all other parties in this action who have not yet appeared by serving upon each of them a copy of this order and the Court's Individual Rules and Practices forthwith, and (2) to file proof of such notice with the Court. If unaware of the identity of counsel for any of the parties, counsel receiving this order must forthwith send a copy of this order and the Court's Individual Rules and Practices to that party personally. SO ORDERED. ( Initial Conference set for 8/17/2022 at 03:00 PM in Courtroom 1105, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/5/22) (yv) (Entered: 05/06/2022) |
| 5/4/2022 | 6 | AO 120 FORM PATENT - CASE OPENING - SUBMITTED. In compliance with the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 290, the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is hereby advised that a court action has been filed on the following patent(s) in the U.S. District Court Southern District of New York. Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office electronically notified via Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)..(sj) (Entered: 05/04/2022) |
| 5/4/2022 | 5 | ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Block, Inc...(sj) (Entered: 05/04/2022) |
| 5/4/2022 | Case Designated ECF. (sj) (Entered: 05/04/2022) | |
| 5/4/2022 | Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (sj) (Entered: 05/04/2022) | |
| 5/4/2022 | CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(sj) (Entered: 05/04/2022) | |
| 5/4/2022 | ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING CIVIL. CASE OPENING STATISTICAL ERROR CORRECTION: Notice to attorney David John Hoffman. The following case opening statistical information was erroneously selected/entered: County code Albany. The following correction(s) have been made to your case entry: the County code has been modified to XX Out of State. (sj) (Entered: 05/04/2022) | |
| 5/4/2022 | ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney David John Hoffman. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: Block, Inc. dba Tidal. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: alias party type was entered incorrectly. (sj) (Entered: 05/04/2022) | |
| 5/3/2022 | 4 | REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Block, Inc. dba Tital, re: 1 Complaint. Document filed by EscapeX IP LLC..(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 05/03/2022) |
| 5/3/2022 | 3 | AO 120 FORM PATENT - NOTICE OF SUBMISSION BY ATTORNEY. AO 120 Form Patent/Trademark for case opening submitted to court for review..(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 05/03/2022) |
| 5/3/2022 | 2 | CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 05/03/2022) |
| 5/3/2022 | 1 | COMPLAINT against Block, Inc. dba Tidal. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-26095253)Document filed by EscapeX IP LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Claim Charts, # 2 Exhibit US9009113).(Hoffman, David) (Entered: 05/03/2022) |
