Grgurev v. Licul, 1:15–cv–9805–GHW
| Court | United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York |
| Writing for the Court | GREGORY H. WOODS, United States District Judge |
| Citation | 229 F.Supp.3d 267 |
| Parties | Ferdo GRGUREV and Omer Grgurev, individually and derivatively, Plaintiffs, v. Milan LICUL, Branco Turcinovic, Dennis Turcinovic, Five "M" Corp., 268 SH Restaurant Corp., Delmonico's Distribution LLC, and 268 SH Restaurant Corp., Defendants, and Ocinomled Ltd. and 50/50 Restaurant Corp., Nominal Defendants. |
| Docket Number | 1:15–cv–9805–GHW |
| Decision Date | 26 January 2017 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
24 practice notes
-
Franklin v. X Gear 101, LLC, 17 Civ. 6452 (GBD) (GWG)
...reality manifest tangible forms of property, such as electronic records or stock certificates, see id. at 289, 292; Grgurev v. Licul, 229 F. Supp. 3d 267, 286-87 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (citing cases), those exceptions do not include the right to use a trademark, Grgurev, 229 F. Supp. 3d at 286-87;......
-
Great W. Ins. Co. v. Graham, 18-CV-6249 (VSB)
...to show a "specific and direct" benefit to Defendants, at Plaintiff's expense.35 Kaye, 202 F.3d at 616; see also Grgurev v. Licul, 229 F. Supp. 3d 267, 298 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) ("[An] unjust enrichment . . . differs from a conversion claim in that it does not require a specific and identifiable ......
-
Arcadia Biosciences, Inc. v. Vilmorin & Cie, 18-cv-8059 (JSR)
...N.Y.S.2d 873, 864 N.E.2d at 1278. However, as the courts in Harris v. Coleman, 863 F.Supp.2d 336 (S.D.N.Y. 2012), and Grgurev v. Licul, 229 F.Supp.3d 267 (S.D.N.Y. 2017), have thoughtfully explained in the intellectual property context, there is a difference between an electronic record of ......
-
Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Dep't of Def., 17 Civ. 3391 (PAE)
...so intertwined with properly classified factual information as to justify withholding the entire paragraph. See, e.g. , ACLU v. DOJ , 229 F. Supp. 3d at 267 (agency could withhold memorandum, despite court's doubts 435 F.Supp.3d 565 that "each and every word" is classified); cf. N.Y. Times ......
Request a trial to view additional results
24 cases
-
Franklin v. X Gear 101, LLC, 17 Civ. 6452 (GBD) (GWG)
...reality manifest tangible forms of property, such as electronic records or stock certificates, see id. at 289, 292; Grgurev v. Licul, 229 F. Supp. 3d 267, 286-87 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) (citing cases), those exceptions do not include the right to use a trademark, Grgurev, 229 F. Supp. 3d at 286-87;......
-
Great W. Ins. Co. v. Graham, 18-CV-6249 (VSB)
...a "specific and direct" benefit to Defendants, at Plaintiff's expense.35 Kaye, 202 F.3d at 616; see also Grgurev v. Licul, 229 F. Supp. 3d 267, 298 (S.D.N.Y. 2017) ("[An] unjust enrichment . . . differs from a conversion claim in that it does not require a specific and identi......
-
Am. Civil Liberties Union v. Dep't of Def., 17 Civ. 3391 (PAE)
...so intertwined with properly classified factual information as to justify withholding the entire paragraph. See, e.g. , ACLU v. DOJ , 229 F. Supp. 3d at 267 (agency could withhold memorandum, despite court's doubts 435 F.Supp.3d 565 that "each and every word" is classified); cf. N......
-
Arcadia Biosciences, Inc. v. Vilmorin & Cie, 18-cv-8059 (JSR)
...N.Y.S.2d 873, 864 N.E.2d at 1278. However, as the courts in Harris v. Coleman, 863 F.Supp.2d 336 (S.D.N.Y. 2012), and Grgurev v. Licul, 229 F.Supp.3d 267 (S.D.N.Y. 2017), have thoughtfully explained in the intellectual property context, there is a difference between an electronic record of ......
Request a trial to view additional results