IP Verse

Lexidine, Llc V. Aamp Of Florida, Inc. - 8:24-cv-00093

Explore the details of the Lexidine, Llc V. Aamp Of Florida, Inc. case under case number 8:24-cv-00093 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
8:24-cv-00093
Filing Date
Jan 9, 2024
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
Lexidine, LLC -
AAMP of Florida, Inc. -

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

Jan 10, 2024NOTICE TO COUNSEL James F. McDonough, III of Local Rule 2.01(a), which requires membership or special admission in the Middle District bar to practice in the Middle District, except for the limited exceptions identified in the Rule. To apply for membership in the Middle District, visit www.flmd.uscourts.gov/for-lawyers. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (TRF) (Entered: 01/10/2024)PACER Document
Jan 10, 2024NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge Steven D. Merryday and Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson. New case number: 8:24-cv-00093-SDM-TGW. (TRF) (Entered: 01/10/2024)PACER Document
Jan 15, 2024Unopposed MOTION for Danielle De La Paz to appear pro hac vice, Special Admission fee paid, Receipt No. AFLMDC-21656486 for $150 by Lexidine, LLC. (Gilchrist, Brian) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson. (Entered: 01/15/2024)PACER Document
Jan 16, 2024ORDER denying without prejudice 7 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson on 1/16/2024. (KMN) (Entered: 01/16/2024)PACER Document
Jan 16, 2024Amended MOTION for Danielle De La Paz to appear pro hac vice by Lexidine, LLC. (Gilchrist, Brian) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson. (Entered: 01/16/2024)PACER Document
Jan 17, 2024ORDER granting 9 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson on 1/17/2024. (ABC) (Entered: 01/18/2024)PACER Document
Jan 29, 2024Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 1 Complaint by Lexidine, LLC. (De La Paz, Danielle) (Entered: 01/29/2024)PACER Document
Mar 1, 2024Second MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 1 Complaint by Lexidine, LLC. (De La Paz, Danielle) (Entered: 03/01/2024)PACER Document
Apr 3, 2024UNOPPOSED MOTION to Stay Proceedings Pending Settlement and Third Request to Extend Time for Defendant to Respond to Complaint by Lexidine, LLC. (De La Paz, Danielle) Modified on 4/4/2024 to edit text (ELM). (Entered: 04/03/2024)PACER Document
Apr 4, 2024ORDER dismissing this action subject to the right of any party within sixty days (1) to submit a stipulated form of final order or (2) to move to vacate the dismissal for good cause; denying as moot 15--motion to stay. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 4/4/2024. (WBW) (Entered: 04/04/2024)PACER Document
Apr 8, 2024Patent Report electronically sent to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. (AJS) (Entered: 04/08/2024)PACER Document
Jan 30, 2024ENDORSED ORDER: The plaintiff moves unopposed to extend the time within which the defendant may respond to the complaint. The motion (Doc. 11) is GRANTED. No later than MARCH 3, 2024, the defendant must respond. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 1/30/2024. (WBW) (Entered: 01/30/2024)PACER Document
Mar 6, 2024ENDORSED ORDER: The plaintiff's unopposed motion (Doc. 13) to extend the time within which the defendant must respond to the complaint is GRANTED. No later than APRIL 3, 2024, the defendant must respond. ABSENT AN EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCE, NO FURTHER EXTENSION IS AVAILABLE. Signed by Judge Steven D. Merryday on 3/6/2024. (WBW) (Entered: 03/06/2024)PACER Document
Apr 5, 2024NOTICE of Local Rule 1.11(e), which provides that, unless an order states another time, a seal under Rule 1.11 expires ninety days after a case is closed and all appeals are exhausted. To prevent the content of a sealed item from appearing on the docket after the seal expires, a party or interested non-party must move for relief before the seal expires. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (RLK) (Entered: 04/05/2024)PACER Document