Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Candy Dynamics, Inc v. Cap Candy, LLC et al
as 2:2023cv01702
Plaintiff:
Circle City Marketing & Distributing, Inc. d/b/a Candy Dynamics and Candy Dynamics, Inc.
Defendant:
Cap Candy, LLC and Unbeatable Power, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
Total Quality Logistics, LLC v. Logistic Dynamics, Inc. et al
as 1:2018cv00629
Defendant:
Logistic Dynamics, Inc. and Shelby Hyde
Plaintiff:
Total Quality Logistics, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Total Quality Logistics, LLC v. Black et al
as 1:2018cv00068
Plaintiff:
Total Quality Logistics, LLC
Defendant:
Logistic Dynamics, Inc. and Matthew Geiselhart
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Reagan v. ArcelorMittal, et al
as 2:2011cv00035
Plaintiff:
Beville H Reagan
Defendant:
ArcelorMittal , ArcelorMittal USA, Inc , United States Steel Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Dantec Dynamics, Inc. v. LaVision Inc.
as 2:2010cv14772
Plaintiff:
Dantec Dynamics, Inc.
Defendant:
LaVision Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Light Source, Inc. v. Display Dynamics, Inc.
as 2:2009cv14268
Plaintiff:
Light Source, Inc.
Defendant:
Display Dynamics, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Type:
Other Statutes
Cisco Systems Capital Corporation v. Network Dynamics Inc. et al
as 1:2007cv02674
Plaintiff:
Cisco Systems Capital Corporation and Cisco Systems Capital Corporation
Defendant:
Network Dynamics Inc., Clifford Burgett and William Kirchner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Utilities Dynamics, Inc. v. Stones River Electric, Inc.
as 5:2007cv00081
Plaintiff:
Utilities Dynamics, Inc.
Defendant:
Stones River Electric, Inc. and Stones River Electric, Inc.
Counter Claimant:
Stones River Electric, Inc.
Counter Defendant:
Utilities Dynamics, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Contract Dispute
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.
