Cases 1 - 10 of 554
Ortega v. Secure One Capital Corporation
as 5:2024cv00519
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
Secure One Capital Corporation
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
MAXI MARKETS LTD et al v. EU PAYMENTZ LLC et al
as 5:2024cv00497
Plaintiff:
MAXI MARKETS LTD, PROMETHEUS LTD and TLM LIMITED
Defendant:
EU PAYMENTZ LLC and ALBERT CHRISTOPHER ORTEGA, a/k/a CHRIS ORTEGA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Ortega v. Sienna Marketing & Consulting Inc.,
as 5:2024cv00487
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
Sienna Marketing & Consulting Inc.,
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Ortega v. Cally Consulting, PLLC
as 5:2024cv00439
Plaintiff:
Mark Anthony Ortega
Defendant:
Cally Consulting, PLLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Ortega v. Fields et al
as 5:2024cv00440
Plaintiff:
Mark Anthony Ortega
Defendant:
Daniel Gilbert Fields and Eric Doe
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
USA v. Ortega-Martinez
as 24-40258
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Gregorio Ortega-Martinez
Ortega v. JKB FINANCIAL
as 5:2024cv00374
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
JKB FINANCIAL
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Ortega v. DiTommaso Inc.
as 5:2024cv00369
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
DiTommaso Inc.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Ortega v. Priority Contracting and Roofing LLC
as 5:2024cv00351
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
Priority Contracting and Roofing LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
FILING ERROR
as 5:2024cv00331
Plaintiff:
Mark Ortega
Defendant:
Keller Williams Realty Inc
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
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.
