Lesnik v.Eisenmann SE

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 18, 20215:16-cv-01120California770 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. Case No. 16-CV-01120-LHK

GREGOR LESNIK; STJEPAN PAPES,

13 Plaintiffs, ORDER SETTING DEADLINE FOR

SERVICE OF PROCESS ON

14 v. DEFENDANT D2N TEHNOLOGIJE

D.O.O

15 EISENMANN SE, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 Plaintiffs Gregor Lesnik and Stjepan Papes (“Plaintiffs”) filed their initial complaint on March 7, 2016. ECF No. 1. Plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint on July 16, 2016. ECF No. 20. Plaintiffs filed their second amended complaint on November 17, 2017. ECF No. 37. Plaintiffs filed their third amended complaint on October 31, 2018. ECF No. 269. On March 28, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a Summons Returned that purported to establish that Defendant D2N Tehnologije d.o.o. (“Defendant”) had been properly served. ECF No. 366. On April 17, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a motion for entry of default against Defendant. ECF No. 387. On April 17, 2019, the Court stayed the case. ECF No. 394. On October 30, 2019, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.