Search for: "JOHN DOES 1 -10"
Results 21 - 40
of 9,050
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Jul 2012, 4:29 pm
John Does 1-45, Doe #41 has filed a motion to sever John Does 2-45, dismiss the complaint as to them, and quash the related subpoenas.Notice of MotionMemorandum of LawDoe #41 DeclarationMorlan Ty Rogers Affidavit var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true}; Ray Beckerman, PC [read post]
27 May 2015, 10:20 am
Petitioner John Doe,1 who was living at the time in a vacant house adjacent to the property, was arrested in connection with the burglary, but then released. [read post]
27 Jun 2012, 3:21 pm
A motion to quash is being made by John Doe #4, in Malibu Media v. [read post]
12 Sep 2012, 10:49 am
John Does 1-26 Court Case Number: 4:12-cv-00048-JVB-PRC File Date: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 Plaintiff: Third Degree Films Inc Plaintiff Counsel: Paul Joseph Nicoletti of Nicoletti & Associates, PLLC Defendant: John Does 1-26 Cause: Direct Copyright Infringement, Contributory Copyright Infringement Court: Northern District of Indiana Judge: Judge Joseph S. [read post]
31 May 2012, 1:53 pm
Does 1-37, has severed as to all defendants except John Doe #1, and granted discovery as to John Doe #1.Report and recommendation severing as to John Does 2-11Order granting discovery as to John Doe #1 only[Ed. note. [read post]
23 May 2013, 5:14 pm
John Does 1-14 (Romantic Memories) Court Case Number: 1:13-cv-00166-PPS-RBCFile Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2013Plaintiff: Malibu Media LLCPlaintiff Counsel: Paul J. [read post]
23 May 2013, 5:11 pm
John Does 1-14 (Romantic Memories) Court Case Number: 1:13-cv-00164-PPS-RBCFile Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2013Plaintiff: Malibu Media LLCPlaintiff Counsel: Paul J. [read post]
7 Aug 2012, 11:47 am
A third John Doe has filed a motion to quash in Patrick Collins Inc. v. [read post]
22 Dec 2017, 6:13 am
Under Rule 15(c)(1)(c), "lack of knowledge of a John Doe defendant's name does not constitute a mistake of identity," which means you have to name them before the statute of limitations runs out. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 6:00 am
In court proceedings, the names John Doe or Jane Doe -- or John or Jane Roe -- are used as legal placeholders (scroll down) for various reasons. [read post]
20 Apr 2008, 1:41 pm
Does 1-14 (Phoenix, AZ) was turned over one day after John Doe #3 had filed a motion to quash the subpoena, and on the same day that John Doe #8 joined in John Doe #3's motion.We have no idea how this happened, but it would seem that (a) the University of Arizona should not have responded to the subpoena when a motion to quash the subpoena had been filed, and (b) the motions to quash aren't going to be of much use to… [read post]
19 Apr 2008, 6:13 am
Does 1-41?] [read post]
23 May 2013, 6:30 am
John Doe 9 Related Case: Malibu Media LLC v. [read post]
14 Mar 2013, 3:41 pm
John Doe Court Case Number: 1:13-cv-00071-RLM-RBCFile Date: Thursday, March 14, 2013Plaintiff: Malibu Media LLCPlaintiff Counsel: Paul J. [read post]
11 Sep 2008, 6:28 pm
Does 1-9, the Columbus, Ohio, case in which the Magistrate Judge had dismissed and severed as to John Does 2-9 due to their misjoinder, but granted the RIAA's motion for discovery, the District Judge sustained the rulings of the Magistrate, over objections from both sides, in a July 29, 2008, decision.Now the RIAA has filed a Notice of Dismissal Without Prejudice.July 29, 2008, Decision affirming Magistrate Judge's rulingsNotice of Dismissal Without… [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 11:07 am
Katy Perry licensee files John Doe action in anticipation of infringers at upcoming show in Michigan. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 4:29 am
Here, John Doe's argument didn't fall into these exceptions so the Court could not (and did not) quash the subpoena.Motion to quash subpoena, denied.Malibu Media, LLC v. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 1:36 pm
Cleveland, holding that John Doe claims do not relate back under FRCP 15(c)(1)(C), because intentionally pleading a Doe placeholder when the plaintiff does not know the defendant's name is not a mistake concerning the proper party's identity. [read post]
14 Mar 2008, 2:21 am
Does 1-34, 07-CV-00405.As in LaFace v. [read post]
10 Jun 2008, 3:22 pm
Does 1-38, targeting North Carolina State University students, which was dismissed as to all but one of the John Does for misjoinder.The RIAA commenced separate actions against some of the John Does, and in two of those cases, SONY v. [read post]
