civil-litigation intellectual-property patent-litigation trademark tort real-estate federal-courts court-watch

Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc. et al v. Denice Shakarian Halicki et al

20-cv-01344 C.D. Cal.
Active Active litigation Sign in to follow this case
Share mail
Advertisement
description

Case Summary

Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc. et al v. Denice Shakarian Halicki et al is a civil case with a current summary of. The case was filed in the unknown court with docket number 20-cv-01344. The details of the case are not available.

No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.

Key Issues

  • • Injury, negligence, and damages claims
  • • Trademark confusion and brand-rights claims
  • • Current docket activity and next procedural step
  • • Patent validity, infringement, and damages
  • • Real-estate, land-use, or property disputes
smart_toy Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records. How we verify our work.
fact_check

Docket Snapshot

account_balance

Court

C.D. Cal.

Central District of California · 9th Circuit · CA

tag

Docket

Not captured

Civil

timeline

Stage

Active litigation

Active

event

Filed

Date unavailable

Not in the available feed

new_releases

Latest Filing

8:20-cv-01344 Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc. et al v. Denice Shakarian Halicki et al

Other · Apr 24, 2026

newspaper

Coverage

1 article

1 source tracked

groups

Participants

1 Defendant, 1 Plaintiff

2 linked entities

gavel

Judge

Not assigned in feed

What the record shows

This case is tied to Central District of California, a federal district court in CA.

The newest docket activity we have is a other dated April 24, 2026.

The visible party/entity graph currently includes Denice Shakarian Halicki, 8:20-cv-01344 Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc.

Press monitoring has found 1 related article from 1 distinct source.

chronic

The Story So Far

Updated 1 day, 21 hours ago

Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc. et al v. Denice Shakarian Halicki et al is an active civil matter in Central District of California under docket 20-cv-01344.

The dispute currently identifies 8:20-cv-01344 Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc on one side and Denice Shakarian Halicki on the other. The case is currently organized around Injury, negligence, and damages claims, Trademark confusion and brand-rights claims, Current docket activity and next procedural step, Patent validity, infringement, and damages.

Denice Shakarian Halicki et al is a civil case with a current summary of. The case was filed in the unknown court with docket number 20-cv-01344. The details of the case are not available.

On April 24, 2026, the docket recorded a other: The court granted a default judgment in favor of Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc. against Denice Shakarian Halicki, as the defendant failed to respond to the lawsuit. This judgment allows the plaintiff to recover damages for alleged trademark infringement.

The.

The next thing to watch is whether the latest other produces a substantive order, a scheduling change, a settlement signal, or a filing that clarifies the parties' positions.

smart_toy Juryvine case narrative generated from the full docket timeline. How we verify our work.

About This Court

Central District of California (C.D. Cal.) is a federal district court in the 9th Circuit, CA.

Advertisement

Case Timeline

1 event
info
Other April 24, 2026

8:20-cv-01344 Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc. et al v. Denice Shakarian Halicki et al

The court granted a default judgment in favor of Carroll Shelby Licensing, Inc. against Denice Shakarian Halicki, as the defendant failed to respond to the lawsuit. This judgment allows the plaintiff to recover damages for alleged trademark infringement. The court's decision is significant because it upholds the plaintiff's intellectual property rights.

description View filing open_in_new
Advertisement
newspaper

Press Coverage

1 article
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more

Sources tracked

1 outlet · 1 article

Timeline events

1 record on file

Last updated

1 day, 21 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.