Mann v. Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation et al
| Clarence Mann |
| Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim USA Corporation, Chattem, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline (America) Inc., GlaxoSmithKline LLC, Patheon Manufacturing Service LLC, Sanofi US Services Inc., CVS Pharmacy, Inc., Duane Reade, Inc., Fred Meyer Stores, Inc., Smith's Food and Drug Centers, Inc., The Kroger Co., Walgreen Co. and Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. |
| 3:2023cv12603 |
| February 19, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Clarence Mann against Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim USA Corporation, CVS Pharmacy, Inc., Chattem, Inc., Duane Reade, Inc., Fred Meyer Stores, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline (America) Inc., GlaxoSmithKline LLC, Patheon Manufacturing Service LLC, Sanofi US Services Inc., Smith's Food and Drug Centers, Inc., The Kroger Co., Walgreen Co., Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc.. Filing fees $ 402.00 receipt number AFLSDC-16344578, filed by Clarence Mann. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Luhana, Roopal) |
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 Florida Southern 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.
