Most notably, for example, Interrogatory No. Princess International's responses to Doug's Word's interrogatories were similarly incomplete.
For example, while Princess International initially stated that a number of documents were "being produced," the company did not actually hand over any responsive documents, including sales agreements or invoices. Princess International was the only Defendant to respond, but its responses were far from comprehensive. Additionally, Doug's Word served its first request for production of documents on December 9, 2016, and its first set of interrogatories on December 20, 2016. The Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order in this action, entered on December 8, 2016, provided that Defendants would provide Doug's Word with "sales and profits" information by January 20, 2017. References to "Defendants" throughout this Opinion are therefore limited to the four Defendants at issue in the motion. For the reasons set forth below, Doug's Word's motion is GRANTED.ĭoug's Word's motion appears to be limited to Princess International, Friedman, Hammacher Schlemmer, and Camelot, and does not seek relief with respect to the other Defendants.
Dougs word clock uk series#
Doug's Word now moves, pursuant to Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for sanctions against those Defendants based on a series of alleged discovery violations. ("Hammacher Schlemmer"), and Camelot Venture Group LLC, ("Camelot"), relating to the manufacture and sale of allegedly infringing clocks. ("Princess International"), Joseph Friedman, Hammacher, Schlemmer & Co., Inc. Plaintiff Doug's Word Clocks.Com ("Doug's Word"), a manufacturer of electronic clocks that display the time in a word format, brings intellectual property claims against various Defendants, including Princess International, Inc. FURMAN, United States District Judge OPINION AND ORDER
0 kommentar(er)
