Moore v. Mars Petcare US, Inc. et al
Moore, Tamara Moore, Greta L. Ervin, Raff Arando, Nichols Smith, Renee Edgren, Cynthia Welton, Isaac Duncan Ham, IV, Ava Sterling, Alayna Johnson, Edward Baker, Christine Karol, Susan Golis, Valerie Robertson, Lynn Tutan and Sean Spaingler |
Mars Petcare US, Inc, Mars Petcare US, Inc., Nestle Purina Petcare Company, Hill's Pet Nutrition, Inc., Petsmart, Inc., Medical Management International, Inc. doing business as Banfield Pet Hospital, Bluepearl Vet, LLC and Royal Canin USA Inc. |
3:2016cv07001 |
December 7, 2016 |
US District Court for the Northern District of California |
Maxine M Chesney |
Sallie Kim |
Kandis A Westmore |
Anti-Trust |
15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 21, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.