newspaper
1:25-cv-10329 Verve Group Europe GMBH v. Zemanta, Inc.
Withdraw as Attorney ( 28
May 5, 2026
1 min read
legal-news
Babayan v. Goodspeed, et al
25-cv-10329
S.D.N.Y.
Advertisement
description
Case Summary
Babayan v. Goodspeed, et al is a case where the current summary is not available. The case is currently pending in an unknown court, with docket number 25-cv-10329.
No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.
Key Issues
- • Unknown Summary
- • Goodspeed, et al
smart_toy
Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records.
How we verify our work.
fact_check
Docket Snapshot
account_balance
Court
S.D.N.Y.
Southern District of New York · 2nd Circuit · NY
tag
Docket
Not captured
Civil
timeline
Stage
Active litigation
Active
event
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
new_releases
Latest Filing
1:25-cv-10329 Verve Group Europe GMBH v. Zemanta, Inc.
Other · May 05, 2026
newspaper
Coverage
2 articles
2 sources tracked
groups
Participants
1 Defendant, 1 Plaintiff, 1 Related Organization
5 linked entities
gavel
Judge
Not assigned in feed
What the record shows
This case is tied to Southern District of New York, a federal district court in NY.
The newest docket activity we have is a other dated May 05, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes Zemanta, Inc, 1:25-cv-10329 Verve Group Europe GMBH and others.
Press monitoring has found 2 related articles from 2 distinct sources.
About This Court
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.) is a federal district court in the 2nd Circuit, NY.
Advertisement
Case Timeline
2 events
info
Other
May 5, 2026
1:25-cv-10329 Verve Group Europe GMBH v. Zemanta, Inc.
The court allowed Verve Group Europe GMBH to withdraw its attorney in the case against Zemanta, Inc. This decision allows Verve Group Europe GMBH to change its representation without penalty. The withdrawal of the attorney does not affect the ongoing case.
info
Other
April 24, 2026
5:25-cv-10329 Babayan v. Goodspeed, et al
The court granted a motion to seal a document in the Babayan v. Goodspeed case. The document's contents were deemed sensitive and potentially prejudicial to the parties involved. This decision allows the parties to protect confidential information.
Advertisement
show_chart
Coverage Timeline
newspaper
2 articles
Press Coverage
newspaper
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more
Sources tracked
2 outlets · 2 articles
Timeline events
2 records on file
Last updated
1 day, 2 hours ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.