legal-news

Moonbug Entertainment Limited et al v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd

21-cv-06536
Active Court order issued Sign in to follow this case
Share mail
Advertisement
description

Case Summary

Moonbug Entertainment Limited et al v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd is a civil case with an unknown court. The case is associated with docket number 21-cv-06536. An order on motion for attorney fees was filed in the case, indicating that the court has made a decision regarding the motion, but the details of the decision are not specified. The filing of an order on motion for attorney fees suggests that the court is considering the parties' requests for attorney fees. The parties involved in the case are Moonbug Entertainment Limited and Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd. The court's decision on the motion for attorney fees may have significant implications for the parties involved in the case.

Latest development

3:21-cv-06536 Moonbug Entertainment Limited et al v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd

Order · April 22, 2026

A Motion was filed.

description View filing

Key Issues

  • motion for attorney fees
  • court decision
  • attorney fees
smart_toy Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records. How we verify our work.

update What Changed This Week

1 event
gavel
Order 18 hours ago
A Motion was filed.
receipt_long Source (filing) expand_more

Order on Motion for Attorney Fees ( 808

Open original open_in_new

Juryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.

Advertisement

Case Timeline

1 event
gavel
Order April 22, 2026

3:21-cv-06536 Moonbug Entertainment Limited et al v. Babybus (Fujian) Network Technology Co., Ltd

A Motion was filed.

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 hour, 29 minutes 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.