• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
10 results

White v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al

Docket 5:20-cv-00073, Texas Eastern District Court (May 4, 2020)
Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III, presiding, Magistrate Judge Caroline Craven
Prisoner - Civil Rights
DivisionTexarkana
FlagsCASREF, PROSE, SA1
Cause28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Case Type550 Prisoner - Civil Rights
Tags550 Prisoner, Civil Rights, 550 Prisoner, Civil Rights
Plaintiff White
Defendant Federal Bureau of Prisons
Plaintiff David White
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Chimney v. Synerprise Consulting Services, Inc.

Docket 9:20-cv-00073, Texas Eastern District Court (Apr. 17, 2020)
District Judge Ron Clark, presiding, Magistrate Judge Zack Hawthorn
Consumer Credit
Log in to see more
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Teso LT, UAB et al v. Bright Data Ltd. et al

Docket 2:20-cv-00073, Texas Eastern District Court (Mar. 5, 2020)
District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, presiding
Patent
DivisionMarshall
FlagsCLOSED, FALSE_MARKING, JRG2, JURY, MEDIATION, PATENT/TRADEMARK, PROTECTIVE-ORDER
Cause28:1331 Fed. Question
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Mediator Alexander Brainerd
Plaintiff Teso LT, UAB
Plaintiff Metacluster LT, UAB
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. DKC Mid-County, L.L.C. et al

Docket 1:20-cv-00073, Texas Eastern District Court (Feb. 26, 2020)
District Judge Marcia A. Crone, presiding
Cable/Satellite TV
DivisionBeaumont
Demand$100,000
Cause28:1331 Fed. Question
Case Type490 Cable/Satellite TV
Tags490 Cable / Satellite Tv, 490 Cable / Satellite Tv
Plaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.
Defendant DKC Mid-County, L.L.C.
Defendant Donald E. Cristopher
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Foreman v. I.C. System, Inc. et al

Docket 6:20-cv-00073, Texas Eastern District Court (Feb. 14, 2020)
District Judge J. Campbell Barker, presiding
Statutory Actions - Other
DivisionTyler
FlagsJURY
Cause15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Case Type890 Statutory Actions - Other
Tags890 Statutory Actions, Other, 890 Statutory Actions, Other
Plaintiff Marion Foreman
Defendant I.C. System, Inc.
Defendant Experian Information Solutions, Inc.
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Grago v. Joseph, Mann & Creed

Docket 4:20-cv-00073, Texas Eastern District Court (Jan. 30, 2020)
District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III, presiding, Magistrate Judge Christine A. Nowak
Consumer Credit
DivisionSherman
FlagsCASREF, JURY, RWS2
Cause15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Case Type480 Consumer Credit
Tags480 Consumer Credit, 480 Consumer Credit
Plaintiff David M. Grago
Defendant Joseph, Mann & Creed
Plaintiff Grago
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

No. 6 ORDER the Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 4 ) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the ...

Document White v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al, 5:20-cv-00073, No. 6 (E.D.Tex. Dec. 5, 2022)
Plaintiff received a copy of this Report but filed no objections, nor has he contacted the Court since that time.
Because Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report, he is barred from de novo review by the District Judge of those findings, conclusions, and recommendations and, except upon grounds of plain error, from appellate review of the unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the District Court.
The Court has reviewed the pleadings in this case and the Report of the Magistrate Judge.
denied, 492 U.S. 918 (1989) (explaining that where no objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”).
It is accordingly ORDERED that the Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 4) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the District Court.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 30 SEALED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Document Teso LT, UAB et al v. Luminati Networks Ltd. et al, 2:20-cv-00073, No. 30 (E.D.Tex. Dec. 15, 2020)
The rule is well-established that “parties who choose to litigate actively on the merits thereby surrender any jurisdictional objections.” PaineWebber Inc. v. Chase Manhattan Private Bank (Switzerland), 260 F.3d 453, 459 (5th Cir. 2001) (citing General Contracting & Trading Co., LLC v. Interpole, Inc., 940 F.2d 20 (1st Cir. 1991)).
The due process analysis focuses on the number and nature of a defendant’s contacts with the forum to determine if the defendant has sufficient “minimum contacts” such “that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.” Int’l Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 326 (1945).
“At a minimum, Rule 9(b) requires allegations of the particulars of time, place, and contents of the false representations, as well as the identity of the person making the misrepresentation and what he obtained thereby.” Benchmark Elecs., Inc. v. J.M.
Only if the first step is satisfied may a court move on to the second, “whether the baseless lawsuit conceals ‘an attempt to interfere directly with the business relationships of a competitor’ through the ‘use [of] the governmental process—as opposed to the outcome of that process—as an anticompetitive weapon.’” Id. (quoting Noerr, 365 U.S. at 144); City of Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc., 499 U.S. 365, 380 (1991).
With respect to Teso’s Lanham Act, false marking, tortious interference, and business disparagement claims, the Court finds that Teso has met the minimum pleading standards to survive 12(b)(6).
cite Cite Document
Analyze
1 2 >>