Samsung Medison America Incorporated v. AmeriaMed East LLC et al

Plaintiff: Samsung Medison America Incorporated
Defendant: AmeriaMed East LLC and RDL Medical Incorporated
Case Number: 2:2013cv00583
Filed: March 21, 2013
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Lawrence O Anderson
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Samsung Medison America Incorporated v. AmeriaMed East LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Samsung Medison America Incorporated
Represented By: John Douglas Parker, II(Designation Retained)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: AmeriaMed East LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: RDL Medical Incorporated
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.