1. Home
  2. State Courts
  3. California
  4. Los Angeles County Superior Courts
  5. Ventro Corporation Vs. Doe One Through Ten, Inclusive
SEARCH TIPS
"" "23STCV06307" Exact match of phrase
* negligen* Match anything after the *
( ) "motion" AND ("dismiss" OR "summary") Grouping of terms
~ "motion to dismiss"~3 Maximum number of positions allowed between matching words
AND "damages" AND "injuries" AND "relief" Both terms must appear in document
OR "modify" OR "amend" Either terms can appear in document
judge:last-name judge:Abbot Filter by a specific judge name.
party:party-name party:"Apple inc" Filter by a specific party name.
To learn more visit - https://support.trellis.law/boolean-operators
Date
"" "23STCV06307" Exact match of phrase
* negligen* Match anything after the *
( ) "motion" AND ("dismiss" OR "summary") Grouping of terms
~ "motion to dismiss"~3 Maximum number of positions allowed between matching words
AND "damages" AND "injuries" AND "relief" Both terms must appear in document
OR "modify" OR "amend" Either terms can appear in document
judge:last-name judge:Abbot Filter by a specific judge name.
party:party-name party:"Apple inc" Filter by a specific party name.
To learn more visit - https://support.trellis.law/boolean-operators

Contents

Details Parties Case Events

We are checking for the latest updates in this case. We will email you when the process is complete.

Ventro Corporation Vs. Doe One Through Ten, Inclusive

Case Last Refreshed: 1 year ago

Track Case Changes
Download Docket Print Docket

Ventro Corporation, filed a(n) Injunct Relief-Not Dom/Harrassmt (General Jurisdiction) case represented by Mayer Brown & Platt Law Offices Of, Mayer Brown & Platt Llp, against Doe One, Doe One Through Ten Inclusive, in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts Stanley Mosk Courthouse with Judith M. Ashmann presiding.

Case Details for Ventro Corporation v. Doe One , et al.

Case Number

(Subscribe to View)

Judge

Judith M. Ashmann

Filing Date

August 15, 2001

Category

Injunct Relief-Not Dom/Harrassmt (General Jurisdiction)

Last Refreshed

September 06, 2022

Filing Location

Los Angeles County, CA

Filing Court House

Stanley Mosk Courthouse

Case Outcome Type

Dismissed - Other

Case Cycle Time

83 days

Parties for Ventro Corporation v. Doe One , et al.

Plaintiffs

Ventro Corporation

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Mayer Brown & Platt Law Offices Of

Mayer Brown & Platt Llp

Defendants

Doe One

Doe One Through Ten Inclusive

Case Events for Ventro Corporation v. Doe One , et al.

Date Type Description
November 06, 2001 Hearing Request for Dismissal (without prejudice; Complaint )
Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr
August 16, 2001 Hearing Ex-Parte Application (re: leave to conduct early discovery )
Filed by Plaintiff
August 16, 2001 Hearing Order (granting ex parte application )
Filed by Plaintiff
August 15, 2001 Docket Event Complaint
See all events
Request redaction

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.