Paisley Park Enters., Inc. v. Boxill

D. Maine

Paisley Park Enters., Inc. v. Boxill

299 F. Supp. 3d 1074

District Court, D. Maine·Decided October 26, 2017·No. Case No. 17–cv–1212 (WMW/TNL)·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Based on the foregoing analysis and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED :

1. Defendants' motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 70), is GRANTED with respect to Count Eight of the Amended Complaint, which is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE , and DENIED in all other respects, as outlined herein.

2. Plaintiffs' motion for an order to show cause for civil contempt, (Dkt. 88), is DENIED .

3. Within 14 days after the date of this Order, Plaintiffs must verify in writing that the bond issued on May 4, 2017 secures the preliminary injunction order or post a new bond in the amount of $1 million to secure the preliminary injunction order.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Based on the foregoing analysis and all the files, records and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED :

1. Defendants' motion to dismiss, (Dkt. 70), is GRANTED with respect to Count Eight of the Amended Complaint, which is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE , and DENIED in all other respects, as outlined herein.

2. Plaintiffs' motion for an order to show cause for civil contempt, (Dkt. 88), is DENIED .

3. Within 14 days after the date of this Order, Plaintiffs must verify in writing that the bond issued on May 4, 2017 secures the preliminary injunction order or post a new bond in the amount of $1 million to secure the preliminary injunction order.

Paisley Park Enters., Inc. v. Boxill, 299 F. Supp. 3d 1074 (D. Me. 2017).

Pincite

299 F. Supp. 3d 1074 (Paisley Park Enters., Inc. v. Boxill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related