DOBY et al v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC et al
| David Doby and John Doby |
| Glenmark Generics, Ltd., Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc., USA, GLAXOSMITHKLINE PLC and Glenmark Generics, Inc. USA |
| 1:2020cv00216 |
| March 6, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina |
| Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 6, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney GARY WALKER JACKSON on behalf of Plaintiffs David Doby, John Doby (JACKSON, GARY) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney CHRISTOPHER R. BAGLEY on behalf of Plaintiffs David Doby, John Doby (BAGLEY, CHRISTOPHER) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC, GLAXOSMITHKLINE PLC, Glenmark Generics, Inc. USA, Glenmark Generics, Ltd., Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc., USA, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0418-2767040.), filed by David Doby, John Doby. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proposed Summons-GSK LLC, #3 Proposed Summons-GSK PLC, #4 Proposed Summons-Glenmark Ltd., #5 Proposed Summons-Glenmark USA, #6 Proposed Summons-Glenmark Gens., #7 Proposed Summons-Glenmark Gens. USA)(BAGLEY, CHRISTOPHER) |
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 North Carolina Middle 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.
