Cases 1 - 10 of 66
Borozny et al. v. RTX Corporation, Pratt & Whitney Division, et al
as 3:2021cv01657
Plaintiff:
David Granata, James Rowe, Stephen Dowe and others
Defendant:
Pratt & Whitney, a Division of Raytheon Technologies Corporation, QuEST Global Services-NA, Inc., Belcan Engineering Group, LLC and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Tom Conroy, Christopher Novoa, Scott Prentiss and others
Consolidated Defendant:
Belcan LLC, Co-Conspirator, Does 1-50 and others
Amicus Curiae:
American Staffing Association
Interested Party:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15 Antitrust Litigation
7-Eleven, Inc. et al v. Visa Inc. et al
as 1:2013cv05746
Petitioner:
The Gymboree Corporation, The Children's Place Retail Stores, Inc., Thornton's Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Marathon Petroleum Company LP, Priceline.com, LLC, National RailRoad Passenger Corporation and others
Respondent:
Mastercard Incorporated, Wells Fargo & Company, Citigroup Inc and others
Interested Party:
Cardtronics USA, Inc. and John Hancock Life Insurance Company (USA)
Material Witne:
Verifone, Inc.
Not Classified By Court:
Transform SR Holdings LLC and Elgin Ave. Recovery, LLC
Defendant:
Citicorp Credit Services, Inc. (USA)
Special Master:
James Orenstein
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
In re Novartis and Par Antitrust Litigation
as 1:2018cv04361
Defendant:
Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Drogueria Betances, LLC, H-E-B LP, Rite Aid Hdqtrs. Corp., and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Law Enforcement Health Benefits Inc., Turlock Irrigation District and UFCW Local 1500 Welfare Fund
Respondent:
Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Not Classified By Court:
Lupin Ltd., Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., OptumRX, Inc. and others
Interested Party:
Caremark PHC, LLC and Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
In re Bystolic Antitrust Litigation
as 23-410
Debtor:
In re: Watson Laboratories, Inc.
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CVS Pharmacy, Inc., Rite Aid Corporation, Rite Aid Hdqtrs. Corp. and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Forest Laboratories Inc., Forest Laboratories Ireland, LTD, Forest Laboratories Holdings Ltd. and others
In re Bystolic Antitrust Litigation
as 23-420
Debtor:
In re: Watson Laboratories, Inc.
Plaintiff:
J M Smith Corporation, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, DBA Smith Drug Company, KPH Healthcare Services, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated also known as Kinney Drugs, Inc, Albertsons Companies, Inc. and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
UFCW local 1500 Welfare Fund, Teamsters Western Region & Local 177 Health Care Plan, Fraternal Order Of Police Miami Lodge 20, Insurance Trust Fund and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Forest Laboratories Inc., Forest Laboratories Ireland, LTD, Forest Laboratories Holdings Ltd. and others
In re Bystolic Antitrust Litigation
as 23-418
Debtor:
In re: Watson Laboratories, Inc.
Plaintiff:
J M Smith Corporation, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, DBA Smith Drug Company, KPH Healthcare Services, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated also known as Kinney Drugs, Inc, UFCW local 1500 Welfare Fund and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Albertsons Companies, Inc., H-E-B L.P., The Kroger Co. and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Forest Laboratories Inc., Forest Laboratories Ireland, LTD, Forest Laboratories Holdings Ltd. and others
In re: In re Bystolic Antitrust Litigation
as 23-423
Debtor:
In re: Watson Laboratories, Inc.
Plaintiff:
UFCW local 1500 Welfare Fund, Teamsters Western Region & Local 177 Health Care Plan, Fraternal Order Of Police Miami Lodge 20, Insurance Trust Fund and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
J M Smith Corporation, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, DBA Smith Drug Company and KPH Healthcare Services, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated also known as Kinney Drugs, Inc
Defendant / Appellee:
Forest Laboratories Inc., Forest Laboratories Ireland, LTD, Forest Laboratories Holdings Ltd. and others
In Re: Auction Houses Anti., et al v. , et al
as 1:2000cv00648
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Robert A. Daly, Jr., Ronald Black, Vicki Haberman and others
Claimant:
N.B.S. Diamonds, Inc., Seymour Stein, Louis Glick Diamond Corp. d/b/a Louis Glick & Co. and others
Consolidated Defendant:
Sotheby's Inc., Christopher M. Davidge, Abraham & Associates and others
Defendant:
Fataihi Company of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, A. Alfred Taubman, Swicorp, S.A. and others
Interested Party:
United States Of America and The United States of America
Intervenor Plaintiff:
J&J Lubrano, Giovanna Terruzzi, Pamela Alper and others
Petitioner:
Boies, Schiller & Flexner, L.L.P.
Plaintiff:
Herbert Black
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
In re: Treasury Securities Auc
as 22-943
Plaintiff:
Arkansas Teacher Retirement System, Beaver County Employees' Retirement Fund, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Marc Federighi, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Michael St. John, BNP Paribas Securities Corp., Bank of Nova Scotia, New York Agency and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
City of Pontiac Police and Fire Retirement System, On behalf of itself and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Cleveland Bakers and Teamsters Pension Fund, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Cleveland Bakers and Teamsters Health and Welfare Fund, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated and others
Defendant:
BMO Capital Markets Corp., CIBC World Markets Corp., Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. and others
Araman v. Real Estate Board of New York
as 22-1051
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Christine M. Araman
Defendant / Appellee:
Real Estate Board of New York, 237 W. 105th Street LLC, c/o Fred L. Seeman Esq., Real Broker LLC and others
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.
