Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Maxill Inc. v. Loops, LLC

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle

May 3, 2019

MAXILL INC., an Ohio corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
LOOPS, LLC; and LOOPS FLEXBRUSH, LLC, Defendants. LOOPS, L.L.C.; and LOOPS FLEXBRUSH, L.L.C., Plaintiffs,
v.
MAXILL INC., a Canadian corporation; and DOES 1-10, Defendants.

          MINUTE ORDER

         The following Minute Order is made by direction of the Court, the Honorable Thomas S. Zilly, United States District Judge:

         (1) Loops, L.L.C. and Loops Flexbrush, L.L.C. (collectively, “Loops”) are DIRECTED to show cause by May 31, 2019, why defendants Does 1-10 should not be dismissed for failure to identify and join such entities on or before October 22, 2018, the deadline set forth in the Minute Order entered August 30, 2018, docket no. 23.

         (2) With regard to the parties' first submission under Local Civil Rule 37, docket nos. 32 and 34, the Court ORDERS as follows:

(a) Loops Interrogatory No. 3: Maxill Inc., an Ohio corporation, and Maxill Inc., a Canadian corporation, (collectively, “Maxill”) are DIRECTED to identify the entities that have purchased the Accused Products within the United States since May 28, 2013; Maxill's response shall be subject to the restrictions set forth in the Stipulated Protective Order, docket no. 25, for material designated as “Confidential - Attorneys Eyes Only.”
(b) Loops Interrogatory No. 9: Loops has not indicated how Maxill's response to this interrogatory is incomplete, and Loops's request to compel further disclosure from Maxill in response to this interrogatory is DENIED.
(c) Loops Interrogatory No. 10: This interrogatory seeks essentially the same information as Interrogatory No. 3, and the Court's ruling concerning Interrogatory No. 3 renders moot the parties' dispute regarding Interrogatory No. 10.
(d) Loops Request for Production No. 16(h-j): Maxill is DIRECTED to produce profit and loss or similar statements reflecting gross profits on the Accused Products since May 28, 2013, as well as costs, taxes, and/or overhead expenses used to compute net profits; Maxill is DIRECTED to also produce any promotional materials and/or advertisements that were distributed or displayed within the United States relating to the Accused Products; Loops's request to compel from Maxill “all documents mentioning” the Accused Products, including specifications, manuals, invoices, purchase orders, bills of lading, and customs manifests, is DENIED because it seeks discovery that is not proportional to the needs of the case, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1); Maxill's financial information shall be subject to the restrictions set forth in the Stipulated Protective Order, docket no. 25, for material designated as “Confidential - Attorneys Eyes Only, ” but any promotional or advertising materials previously distributed to third parties shall not be treated as “Confidential” or “Confidential - Attorneys Eyes Only.”
(e) Maxill shall comply with the discovery obligations set forth in Paragraphs 2(a)-(d), above, on or before May 24, 2019.

         (3) With regard to the parties' second submission under Local Civil Rule 37, docket nos. 35 and 37, the Court ORDERS as follows:

(a) Request for Production No. 10: Loops is DIRECTED to produce, on or before May 24, 2019, any documents responsive to this request and a statement indicating that a diligent search was performed.
(b) Request for Production No. 7: Loops is DIRECTED to produce, on or before June 14, 2019, profit and loss or similar statements (e.g., unredacted portions of its ledgers) reflecting gross profits, if any, on sales to entities identified by Maxill in response to Loops's Interrogatory No. 3; Loops's disclosures shall be subject to the restrictions set forth in the Stipulated Protective Order, docket no. 25, for material designated as “Confidential - Attorneys Eyes Only.”
(c) Request for Production No. 57: Maxill's request to compel Loops to produce “all records, including any purchase orders, sales and payment receipts” corresponding to “each sales figure” in Loops's previously disclosed ledgers is DENIED because it seeks discovery that is not proportional to the needs of the case, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1).
(d) Request for Production No. 58: Maxill's request to compel Loops to produce “detail records and documents” supporting the foreign ledger, dual ledger, and California ledger previously disclosed is DENIED because it seeks discovery that is not proportional to the needs of the case, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(1).
(e) Request for Production No. 59: Maxill's request to compel Loops to produce “all documents and things” that support Steven Kayser's testimony about Loops's decrease in sales resulting from “counterfeiting” over the last ten years is DENIED; this action concerns Loops's allegations that Maxill is and/or was infringing United States Patent No. 8, 448, 285, which issued on May 28, 2013, and whether Loops suffered losses as a result of ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.