Beckely v. Raith
This text of Beckely v. Raith (Beckely v. Raith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Case: 14-1213 Document: 3 Page: 1 Filed: 04/09/2014
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________
MATTHEW BECKELY, AKA DYLAN MATTHEWS, AKA D-MATT, DBA AMERADA MUSIC, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
REINHARD RAITH, AKA CRAZY FROG, AKA VOODOO & SERANO, RONALD CARROLL, AKA RON CARROLL, AKA R.O.N.N., CERESIA BLANCHARD, AKA CERESIA, PATRICK WEBER, VOODOO MUSIC GMBH, EMBASSY OF MUSIC GMBH, KONRAD VON LOHNEISEN, ONE ENTERTAINMENT GROUP, LLC AND YOUTUBE, LLC, Defendants-Appellees. ______________________
2014-1213 ______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California in No. 3:13-cv-02707- WHA, Judge William H. Alsup. ______________________ ORDER Matthew Beckely has failed to file an initial brief as required by Federal Circuit Rule 31. Accordingly, Case: 14-1213 Document: 3 Page: 2 Filed: 04/09/2014
IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The appeal is dismissed. (2) Each side shall bear its own costs. FOR THE COURT
/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court
s26
ISSUED AS A MANDATE: April 9, 2014
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Beckely v. Raith, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beckely-v-raith-cafc-2014.