Antitrust Cases filed in the Third Circuit Courts
Cases 31 - 40 of 48
LIQUID ALUMINUM SULFATE ANTITRUST LITIGATION
as 2:2016md02687
Plaintiff: Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority, CITY OF FERGUS FALLS, MINNESOTA, INTERSTATE CHEMICAL CO., INC. and others
Defendant: VINCENT J. OPALEWSKI, SOUTHERN IONICS, INC., C&S CHEMICALS (OF GEORGIA) INC. and others
Intervenor: US Department of Justice and Lawrence McShane
Special Master: DENNIS M. CAVANAUGH and JUDGE FAITH S. HOCHBERG
In Re: LIQUID ALUMINUM SULFATE ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
ROCHESTER DRUG CO-OPERATIVE, INC. v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION d/b/a GLAXOSMITHKLINE et al
as 2:2015cv08034
Plaintiff: ROCHESTER DRUG CO-OPERATIVE, INC.
Defendant: SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION d/b/a GLAXOSMITHKLINE, TEVA PHARAMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LTD. and TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
HUGHES v. PNC BANK We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2015cv03147
Plaintiff: RACHEL W,D. HUGHES
Defendant: PNC BANK
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
A & B Campbell Family et al v. Chesakpeake Energy Corporation et al
as 3:2015cv00340
Plaintiff: A & B Campbell Family , Eugene J Barrett, Jr. , Lori R Barrett and others
Defendant: Chesakpeake Energy Corporation, Chesapeake Appalachia,L.L.C., Chesapeake Energy Marketing, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15
F. RUGGIERO & SONS, INC. et al v. NYK LINE (NORTH AMERICA) INC. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2013cv03306
Plaintiff: RUSH TRUCK CENTERS OF OHIO, INC., Hudson Gastonia Acquisition, LLC, Martens Cars of Washington, Inc. and others
Defendant: TOYOFUJI SHIPPING CO. LTD., COMPANIA SUD AMERICANA DE VAPORES S.A., NYK LINE (NORTH AMERICA) INC. and others
In Re: VEHICLE CARRIER SERVICES ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Shah v. Harristown Development Corporation et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2012cv02196
Plaintiff: Hasu P. Shah
Defendant: Harristown Development Corporation , Harristown Holding Company, Inc. , Harristown Hotel Development Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Anti-trust
JACOBS et al v. COLLINS et al
as 3:2012cv03692
Plaintiff: MELISSA JACOBS , ANTHONY D. BERTUCCI, JR. and WAYNE D. PETERS
Defendant: WILLIAM A. COLLINS, DAVID M. FARBER, ISADORE H. MAY and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
T&B ASSOCIATES, INC. v. COLLINS et al
as 3:2012cv03010
Plaintiff: T&B ASSOCIATES, INC.
Defendant: WILLIAM A. COLLINS, DAVID M. FARBER, CHUN LI and others
Movant: Jeanne Van Duzer Lang Boyer and MSC, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BURLINGTON DRUG CO., INC. et al v. PFIZER INC. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2012cv02389
Plaintiff: A.F.L.-A.G.C. Building Trades Welfare Plan, ALLIED SERVICES DIVISION WELFARE FUND, AMERICAN SALES COMPANY INC. and others
Defendant: CALIFORNIA PHYSICIANS SERVICE, CVS Caremark Corporation, DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. and others
Petitioner: MATRIX LABORATORIES LIMITED, MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. and MATRIX LABORATORIES INC.
Special Master: JOSE L. LINARES
In Re: LIPITOR ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Not Classified By Court: FAITH HOCHBERG
Intervenor: MYLAN INC.
Interested Party: CARDINAL HEALTH, INC.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
LOUISIANA WHOLESALE DRUG CO., INC. v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2012cv00995
Defendant: TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS, GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC formerly SmithKline Beecham Corp. d/b/a/ GlaxoSmithKline and others
Interested Party: MEIJER INC.
Amicus Curiae: FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Lead Plaintiff: KING DRUG COMPANY OF FLORENCE, INC., LOUISIANA WHOLESALE DRUG CO., INC. and ROCHESTER DRUG CO-OPERATIVE, INC.
Not Yet Classified: MEIJER DISTRIBUTION, INC., MORRIS & DICKSON CO., L.L.C., FWK HOLDINGS LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation

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.


Why Is My Information Online?