5:26-cv-03163 Tillery v. Google LLC
Case Summary
This case, Tillery v. Google LLC, involves litigation against Google LLC. The current docket entry reflects a procedural update concerning the appearance or withdrawal of legal counsel for one of the parties. No substantive details about the claims or defenses have been provided at this stage.
Stage
Active litigation
Timeline
11 events
Coverage
10 articles
Sources
1
Key Issues
- • Attorney appearance
- • Procedural update
- • Representation change
Case Timeline
11 events5:26-cv-03163 Tillery v. Google LLC
In the case Tillery v. Google LLC, a proposed summons was issued, which is a formal document notifying Google that they are being sued and must respond to the lawsuit. This step officially starts the legal process and requires Google to address the claims made against it. It matters because it moves the case forward from filing to active litigation.
5:23-cv-03527 Smith v. Google, LLC
In the case Tillery v. Google LLC, there was a formal update regarding legal representation, specifically a notice about an attorney either appearing, substituting, changing, or withdrawing from the related case Smith v. Google, LLC. This update is important because it informs the court and parties involved about who is officially representing the interests of the parties in the ongoing litigation.
5:23-cv-03527 Smith v. Google, LLC
In the case Tillery v. Google LLC, there was a formal update regarding legal representation, specifically a notice about an attorney entering or leaving the case. This change affects who is officially handling the legal matters for one of the parties involved. Such updates ensure the court and all parties know who is responsible for legal communications and actions.
5:22-cv-04547 Rabin, CPA et al v. Google LLC
In the case Tillery v. Google LLC, the court issued an order related to a stipulation in the separate case Rabin, CPA et al v. Google LLC. This order likely addresses an agreement between the parties, which can help streamline the legal process. Such orders are important because they reflect cooperation between parties and can influence how the cases proceed.
5:25-cv-07063 Valtrus Innovations Ltd et al v. Google LLC
In the case of Valtrus Innovations Ltd et al v. Google LLC, the parties submitted a joint agreement and a proposed court order for approval. This indicates that both sides have reached a consensus on certain issues, which the court is being asked to formalize. Such agreements can help streamline the litigation process and potentially avoid further disputes.
3:25-cv-03125 Schwarz et al v. Google LLC
A court hearing for the case Schwarz et al v. Google LLC has been scheduled to take place via Zoom, as indicated by the clerk's notice. This means the parties involved will discuss the case remotely, which can affect how the proceedings are conducted. It matters because it sets the timeline and format for the next steps in the legal process.
4:25-cv-01487 Cellular South Inc v. Google, LLC
In the case Tillery v. Google LLC, the court issued an order related to a stipulation in another case, Cellular South Inc v. Google, LLC. This indicates coordination or agreement between the parties in these related cases, which can streamline proceedings. Such orders help manage complex litigation involving multiple related lawsuits.
1:26-cv-03871 Adams v. Google LLC
In the case Adams v. Google LLC, the court granted an extension of time for Google to file their answer to the complaint. This means Google has more time to respond to the allegations made against them. Such extensions are common and help ensure both parties have adequate time to prepare their cases.
1:24-cv-04274 Cengage Learning, Inc. et al v. Google LLC
In the case Tillery v. Google LLC, a related matter involving Cengage Learning, Inc. and others against Google LLC was referenced through a memo endorsement. This indicates the court addressed or noted a procedural or administrative issue related to the Cengage Learning case within the Tillery case docket. Such cross-referencing helps maintain consistency and awareness of related legal proceedings.
3:26-cv-01460 HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC v. Google LLC
In the case of Headwater Research LLC versus Google LLC, a Certificate of Interested Entities and Corporate Disclosure Statement was filed. This document lists any parties or entities that have a financial interest in the outcome of the case, ensuring transparency in the legal process. Such disclosures help the court identify potential conflicts of interest.
5:20-cv-07956 Taylor et al v. Google LLC
In the case Tillery v. Google LLC, an event categorized as 'other' occurred, referencing another case, Taylor et al v. Google LLC. This suggests a procedural or related matter linking the two cases, possibly indicating shared legal issues or coordination between them. Understanding this connection is important for grasping the broader context of litigation involving Google.
Press Coverage
5:26-cv-03163 Tillery v. Google LLC
Proposed Summons ( 2
5:23-cv-03527 Smith v. Google, LLC
Notice of Appearance/Substitution/Change/Withdrawal of Attorney
5:22-cv-04547 Rabin, CPA et al v. Google LLC
Order on Stipulation ( 281
5:25-cv-07063 Valtrus Innovations Ltd et al v. Google LLC
Stipulation and Proposed Order ( 386
3:25-cv-03125 Schwarz et al v. Google LLC
Clerk's Notice Setting Zoom Hearing
4:25-cv-01487 Cellular South Inc v. Google, LLC
Order on Stipulation ( 126
1:26-cv-03871 Adams v. Google LLC
Extension of Time to File Answer ( 9
1:24-cv-04274 Cengage Learning, Inc. et al v. Google LLC
Memo Endorsement ( 833
3:26-cv-01460 HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC v. Google LLC
Certificate of Interested Entities, Corporate Disclosure Statement, or Rule 7.1 Disclosures ( 107