Sanchez v. Revlon, Inc. et al
| Maria D. Sanchez |
| Revlon, Inc., LOreal USA Inc., LOreal USA Products Inc., SoftSheen-Carson LLC., Namaste Laboratories, Revlon Consumer Products Corporation, Revlon Group Holdings LLC, Strength of Nature LLC., Godrej SON Holdings, Inc., Dabur International Ltd., Dabur International USA Ltd. and Dermoviva Skin Essentials, Inc. |
| 1:2023cv09676 |
| September 12, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Mary M Rowland |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 17, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Mary M. Rowland. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan. Case assignment: Direct assignment. (ags) |
| Filing 4 MEMBER CASE OPENED from Northern District of Illinois; ( 1:23-cv-09676 Sanchez v. Revlon, Inc. et al / Direct file in ILND). In Re: Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation (MDL 3060 ) (emc, ) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Maria D. Sanchez by Melanie H. Muhlstock (Muhlstock, Melanie) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Muhlstock, Melanie) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Maria D. Sanchez; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-21048831.(Muhlstock, Melanie) |
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 Illinois 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.
