Ninth Circuit Other Statutes Cases
Cases 221 - 230 of 892
Federal Trade Commission v. General LLC et al
as 3:2016cv00136
Petitioner:
Federal Trade Commission
Respondent:
General LLC and Media LLC
Movant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0045 Federal Trade Commission Act
Fevisa Industrial, S.A. de C.V v. Alvarado Garnica et al
as 3:2016cv00584
Plaintiff:
Fevisa Industrial, S.A. de C.V
Defendant:
Roberto Alvarado Garnica, Gutierrez Trucking, LLC and DOES 1-100
Cause Of Action: 49 U.S.C. § 14706
Kim Paddock v. LoanDepot, LLC et al
as 8:2016cv00330
Defendant:
Cross River Bank, Inc, DOES and LoanDepot, LLC
Plaintiff:
Kim Paddock
Global Quality Foods, Inc. v. Van Hoekelen Greenhouses, Inc.
as 3:2016cv00920
Plaintiff:
Global Quality Foods, Inc.
Defendant:
Van Hoekelen Greenhouses, Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Paragon Mechanical, Inc. v. Estes Express Lines
as 5:2016cv00880
Plaintiff:
Paragon Mechanical, Inc.
Defendant:
Estes Express Lines
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Prosight Specialty Holdings, Inc. v. Admiral Merchants Motor Freight, Inc.
as 2:2016cv00259
Plaintiff:
Prosight Specialty Holdings, Inc.
Defendant:
Admiral Merchants Motor Freight, Inc. and Does 1 through 10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Travelers Property Casualty Company of America vs Maggies Transport Services, LLC
as 2:2016cv01013
Defendant:
Maggies Transport Services, LLC
Plaintiff:
Travelers Property Casualty Company of America
United Van Lines, LLC v. Ruiz
as 3:2016cv00153
Plaintiff:
United Van Lines, LLC, .
Defendant:
Trisha Ruiz
Cause Of Action: 49 U.S.C. § 14705
Wayne Moule v. United Parcel Service Company
as 1:2016at00055
Defendant:
United Parcel Service Company
Plaintiff:
Wayne Moule
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 741
Moule v. United Parcel Service Co.
as 1:2016cv00102
Defendant:
United Parcel Service Co.
Plaintiff:
Wayne Moule
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 741
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
