Cases 41 - 50 of 213
Venegas et al v. Amazon.com Inc et al
as 3:2021cv03269
Plaintiff:
Jose Luis Lomeli Venegas, Martha Nuno de Venegas and Maria Venegas
Defendant:
Amazon.com Inc, Amazon Advertising L L C, Amazon Capital Services Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Venegas et al v. Amazon.com Inc et al
as 1:2021cv03269
Plaintiff:
Jose Luis Lomeli Venegas, Martha Nuno de Venegas and Maria Venegas
Defendant:
Amazon.com Inc, Amazon Advertising, LLC, Amazon Capital Services, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv00575
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Cypers v. Bankcard Central LLC et al
as 4:2021cv00382
Defendant:
Bankcard Central LLC, Rev 19 LLC, Larry Daniels and others
Plaintiff:
Rory Justin Cypers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Better Keiki, LLC et al v. Amazon Payments, Inc. et al
as 4:2021cv00369
Garnishee:
Amazon.com Services, LLC and Amazon Payments, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Senaco Direct and Better Keiki, LLC
Natour et al v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. et al
as 4:2021cv00331
Defendant:
Data Payment Systems, Inc., Elavon, Inc., One Payment Services and others
Plaintiff:
Enclare, LLC and Nick Natour
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Smith v. Google, LLC et al
as 2:2021cv00053
Defendant:
Google Payment Corp. and Google, LLC
Plaintiff:
Edgar Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cypers v. Bankcard Central LLC et al
as 4:2021cv00213
Petitioner:
Rory J Cypers and Rory Justin Cypers
Defendant:
Larry Daniels, Rev 19 LLC, Payment Holdings LLC and others
v. Bankcard Central LLC et al
as 4:2021cv00212
Defendant:
Bankcard Central LLC, Larry Daniels, Rev 19 LLC and others
AML IP, LLC v. PAYMENT APPROVED, LLC et al
as 6:2020cv01197
Plaintiff:
AML IP, LLC
Defendant:
PAYMENT APPROVED, LLC and PAYMENT APPROVED TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
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.
