1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. UMG RECORDINGS, INC. v. GRANDE COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS, LLC
 

UMG RECORDINGS, INC. v. GRANDE COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS, LLC

Cause No. A-17-CA-365-LY.

UMG RECORDINGS, INC., et al., v. GRANDE COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS, LLC.

United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Austin Division.

September 26, 2018.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Cause: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Nature of Suit: 820 Copyright
Source: PACER

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

UMG Recordings, Inc., Capitol Records, LLC, Warner Bros. Records Inc., Sony Music Entertainment, Arista Records LLC, Arista Music, Atlantic Recording Corporation, Capitol Christian Music Group, Inc., Elektra Entertainment Group Inc., Fonovisa, Inc., Fueled by Ramen LLC, LaFace Records LLC, Nonesuch Records Inc., Rhino Entertainment Company, Roadrunner Records, Inc., Roc-A-Fella Records, LLC, Tooth & Nail, LLC & Zomba Recording LLC, Plaintiffs, represented by Jonathan E. Missner , Stein Mitchell Cipollone Beato & Missner LLP, Michael A. Petrino , Stein Mitchell Cipollone Beato & Missner LLP, Paige Arnette Amstutz , Scott, Douglass & McConnico, LLP, Pasquale A. Cipollone , Stein Mitchell Cipollone Beato & Missner LLP, Philip J. O'Beirne , Stein Mitchell Cipollone Beato & Missner LLP, Robert B. Gilmore , Stein Mitchell Cipollone Beato & Missner LLP & Daniel C. Bitting , Scott, Douglas & McConnico, L.L.P.

Grande Communications Networks LLC, Defendant, represented by Diana L. Nichols , Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP, J. Stephen Ravel , Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP, Jennifer E. Hoekel , Armstrong Teasdale LLP, John R. Johnson , Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP, Margaret R. Szewczyk , Armstrong Teasdale LLP, Richard L. Brophy , Armstrong Teasdale LLP, Zachary C. Howenstine , Armstrong Teasdale LLP & Nicholas B. Clifford , Armstrong Teasdale LLP, pro hac vice.

Grande Communication Networks LLC, Defendant, represented by Jennifer E. Hoekel , Armstrong Teasdale LLP & Richard L. Brophy , Armstrong Teasdale LLP.

ORDER

Before the Court are the following discovery motions filed by the parties, as well as the responses and replies to those motions:

• Plaintiffs' Corrected Motion for Protective Order Regarding Defendants' Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition Notices (Dkt. No. 103) • Plaintiffs...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases