MANZ TAIWAN LTD. et al v. DHL GLOBAL CUSTOMER LOGISTICS, INC.

Plaintiff: SAGE ELECTROCHROMICS, INC. and MANZ TAIWAN LTD.
Defendant: DHL GLOBAL CUSTOMER LOGISTICS, INC.
Case Number: 2:2013cv00310
Filed: January 15, 2013
Court: New Jersey District Court
Office: Newark Office
County: Essex
Presiding Judge: Dennis M. Cavanaugh
Referring Judge: Joseph A. Dickson
Nature of Suit: Commerce ICC Rates, Etc.
Cause of Action: 28:1337 Sherman-Clayton Act
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 New Jersey District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MANZ TAIWAN LTD. et al v. DHL GLOBAL CUSTOMER LOGISTICS, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: SAGE ELECTROCHROMICS, INC.
Represented By: JOHN JAMES SULLIVAN
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 ]
Plaintiff: MANZ TAIWAN LTD.
Represented By: JOHN JAMES SULLIVAN
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: DHL GLOBAL CUSTOMER LOGISTICS, INC.
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.