Cases 31 - 40 of 564
FONTEM VENTURES B.V. v. NJOY, INC.
as 1:2015mc00022
Plaintiff:
FONTEM VENTURES B.V.
Defendant:
NJOY, INC. and VAPOR CORP.
Movant:
REYNOLDS AMERICAN INC.
FONTEM VENTURES B.V. et al v. NJOY, INC.
as 1:2015mc00021
Plaintiff:
FONTEM VENTURES B.V. and FONTEM HOLDINGS 1 B.V.
Defendant:
NJOY, INC. and VAPOR CORP.
Movant:
LOEC, INC. and LORILLARD, INC.
Fontem Ventures, B.V. et al v. NJOY, Inc. et al
as 3:2015mc00004
Plaintiff:
Fontem Ventures, B.V. and Fontem Holdings 1 B.V.
Defendant:
NJOY, Inc. and Does 1-5
Movant:
Altria Group, Inc.
Respondent:
Vapor Corp.
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC. v. NO LEAF VAPOR COMPANY, INC. et al
as 1:2015cv00317
Plaintiff:
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC.
Defendant:
NO LEAF VAPOR COMPANY, INC. and LAWRENCE GOLDSTEIN
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1051
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC. v. THE VAPOR SHOP, INC. et al
as 1:2015cv00322
Plaintiff:
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC.
Defendant:
THE VAPOR SHOP, INC. and TODD KUNDERT
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1051
CompuZone Inc v. Vapor Zone Inc et al
as 3:2014cv02389
Plaintiff:
CompuZone Inc
Defendant:
Vapor Zone Inc and International Vapor Group Inc
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
Hana Modz LLC v. Vapor Tek USA LLC et al
as 1:2014cv02235
Plaintiff:
Hana Modz LLC
Defendant:
Vapor Tek USA LLC and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC. v. ZAFRIR et al
as 1:2014cv00417
Plaintiff:
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC.
Defendant:
TAL-OR ZAFRIR, BARAK BELELI, MAZAL ZAFRIR and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC. v. SIMPLY VAPORS, LLC et al
as 1:2014cv00293
Plaintiff:
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS, INC.
Defendant:
SIMPLY VAPORS, LLC and JUDITH ANNE SAMS
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC. v. TRUE VAPOR, INC. et al
as 1:2014cv00229
Plaintiff:
REYNOLDS INNOVATIONS INC.
Defendant:
TRUE VAPOR, INC. and WILLIAM TRANT BULLARD
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
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.
