IP Verse

Elmer Llewyn Sanders V. Nike, Inc. - 2:23-cv-04302

Explore the details of the Elmer Llewyn Sanders V. Nike, Inc. case under case number 2:23-cv-04302 involving a cause of action for Patent Infringement. Review key information about the parties involved, the patents in question, and the docket entries.

Case Details

Case Number
2:23-cv-04302
Filing Date
May 26, 2023
Cause of Action
Patent Infringement
Status
-
Nature of Suit
Patent

Parties Involved in the Case

The following parties are involved in this case, with their respective legal representatives for the case.

NameRepresented By
Lululemon, Inc -
Victorias Secret and Company -
Nike, Inc. -
Under Armour, Inc. -
Elmer Llewyn Sanders -

Patents Involved in the Case

Patents not found - set an alert to get notified when patents are added.

Docket Entries

The Docket Entries section provides a chronological list of all significant filings and court actions in this case.

DateDocket EntryType

Set alerts for critical docket entry

May 26, 2023COMPLAINT filed by Plaintiff Elmer Llewyn Sanders against Defendants Lululemon, Inc, Nike, Inc., Under Armour, Inc., Victorias Secret and Company. Case assigned to Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha for all further proceedings. Discovery referred to Magistrate Judge Patricia Donahue. (jtil) (Entered: 06/05/2023)PACER Document
May 26, 2023APPLICATION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, Declaration in Support filed by Plaintiff Elmer Llewyn Sanders. (jtil) (Entered: 06/05/2023)PACER Document
Jun 5, 2023Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil) (Entered: 06/05/2023)PACER Document
Jun 5, 2023NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) (Entered: 06/05/2023)PACER Document
Jun 5, 2023NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Fernando L Aenlle-Rocha and Magistrate Judge Patricia Donahue. (jtil) (Entered: 06/05/2023)PACER Document
Jun 13, 2023ORDER ON REQUEST TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (NON-PRISONER CASE) by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: The Court finds has not submitted enough information for the Court to tell if the filer is able to pay the filing fees. This is what is missing: Plaintiff has failed to complete the form application to proceed without prepayment of the fees in this action, as he has not answered questions 2 through 8 of the form request he submitted. Accordingly, Plaintiff has failed to provide the Court with any information about his finances or ability to pay the filing fee for this action. Ruling on the Request is POSTPONED for 30 days so that the filer may provide additional information 2 . Within 30 days of the date of this Order, the filer must do the following: Submit a COMPLETED application to proceed in this action without prepayment of the filing fees. In complying with this Order, Plaintiff may use the form he previously used, AO 240, or the Court's standard form request to proceed in forma pauperis, CV-60. Regardless of the form used, Plaintiff must provide answers to all of the questions presented on the form. If the filer does not comply with these instructions within 30 days, this case will be DISMISSED without prejudice. (lc) (Entered: 06/13/2023)PACER Document
Aug 24, 2023ORDER OF DISMISSAL by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: The Court sent a warning letter to Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner(s) Defendant(s)/Respondent(s) advising thatfailure to correct this deficiency within THIRTY DAYS from the date of the warning letter would result in dismissal or remand of this case 2 . More than THIRTY DAYS have now passed, and the deficiency has not been corrected. Accordingly, this case is HEREBY ORDERED DISMISSED without prejudice. MD JS-6, Case Terminated. (lc) (Entered: 08/24/2023)PACER Document