Harry Potter Lexicon Trial

Description: NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by David Saul Hammer on behalf of RDR Books (Hammer, David) (Entered: December 4, 2007)
Date Filed: December 4, 2007
Justia URL: http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/new-york/nysdce/1:2007cv09667/315790/12
DISCLAIMER: IANAL. This is not legal advice or analysis.
Layman's description:

---

( RDR says: It's Hammer Time )

Description: STIPULATION AND ORDER EXTENDING DEFENDANTS TIME TO ANSWER; that the time for defendant RDR Brooks to serve an answer to the complaint of plaintiffs Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. and J.K. Rowling in this captioned case is extended until the Tenth day following the entry of this courts decision and Order on plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 11/20/07) (pl) (Entered: November 21, 2007)
Date Filed: November 21, 2007
Justia URL: http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/new-york/nysdce/1:2007cv09667/315790/11
DISCLAIMER: IANAL. This is not legal advice or analysis.
Layman's description:

---

( RDR gets a few more days to answer )

Description: AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Summons and Complaint. RDR Books served on 10/31/2007, answer due 11/20/2007. Service was accepted by John Doe. Document filed by Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.; J. K. Rowling.
Date Filed: November 14, 2007
Justia URL: http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2007cv09667/315790/10/
DISCLAIMER: IANAL. This is not legal advice or analysis.
Layman's description:

---

( RDR Books: You've been served! )

Description: DECLARATION of Diane Nelson in Support re: 3 Order to Show Cause,,,,,,. Document filed by Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., J. K. Rowling. (Cendali, Dale) (Entered: November 5, 2007)
Date Filed: November 5, 2007
Justia URL: http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2007cv09667/315790/6/
DISCLAIMER: IANAL. This is not legal advice or analysis.
Layman's description: Diane Nelson is president of Warner Premiere. They own the Harry Potter film rights and various trademarks attached thereto.

---

( You can skip this one; it's just part of establishing who's allowed to sue whom. )

Description: RULE 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. Identifying Time Warner Cable Inc. as Corporate Parent. Document filed by Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.(jpo) (Entered: November 2, 2007)
Date Filed: October 31, 2007
Justia URL: http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2007cv09667/315790/2/
DISCLAIMER: IANAL. This is not legal advice or analysis. This is not a true-and-correct representation of anything related to the case. This is provided for entertainment purposes only. Not responsible for typos, html errors, ommissions, or misinterpretations. Read at your own risk. Hail Eris.
Layman's description: Of no interest to anyone who's not a lawyer. When the LOL translation of the trial is written, this doc will say "WE HAZ A CORPRAYSHUN." Says Warner Bros. is a real-and-legit corporation registered in the US yadda yadda.

( Don't bother clicking; this is entirely the most boring document in the whole trial. )