Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Pods Enterprises, Inc v. Abf Freight Systems

November 2, 2011

PODS ENTERPRISES, INC., PLAINTIFF,
v.
ABF FREIGHT SYSTEMS, INC., DEFENDANT.



ORDER

This matter is before the Court sua sponte. On January 12, 2011, Plaintiff PODS Enterprises, Inc. filed a complaint in this Court against Defendant ABF Freight Systems for, among other things, trademark infringement and unfair competition. (Doc. # 1). PODS filed an Amended Complaint on January 21, 2011 (Doc. # 7). ABF filed its Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims (Doc. # 18) on March 25, 2011. ABF asserted four counterclaims, two of which alleged antitrust violations (Counts III and IV). Local Rule 3.05(b)(3) states that "Track Three Cases shall include those cases involving . . . antitrust claims."

The parties filed their Case Management Report (Doc. # 33) on July 22, 2011. Because of the antitrust counterclaims, the parties established a case management time table appropriate to a Track Three case. Accordingly, a preliminary pretrial conference was held before the Honorable Mark A. Pizzo, United States Magistrate Judge, on September 15, 2011 (Doc. # 44).

PODS filed its Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims II-IV and to Strike the Twelfth Affirmative Defense (Doc. # 20) on April 18, 2011. The Court granted the Motion on October 17, 2011, giving ABF leave to file an amended counterclaim within fourteen days, or by October 31, 2011. ABF has not done so, or filed a motion for extension of time to do so; therefore, the Court presumes that ABF no longer asserts the two counterclaims alleging antitrust violations. As a result, this case no longer falls within the definition of Track Three Cases.

Local Rule 3.05(b)(2) states that "Track Two Cases shall include all cases not designated as Track One Cases, and not within the definition of Track Three Cases." The Court therefore determines that it is appropriate to designate this case as a Track Two Case. The Court further directs the parties to file an amended Case Management Report, keeping in mind Local Rule 3.05(c)(2)(E), which states that "it is the goal of the court that a trial will be conducted in all Track Two Cases within two years after the filing of the complaint."

Accordingly, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:

(1) The Clerk is directed to designate this case as a Track Two Case.

(2) The parties are directed to file an amended Case Management Report on or before November 17, 2011.

Copies:

All Counsel and Parties of Record

20111102

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.