Cases 31 - 40 of 3,686
v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al
as 3:2024cv04875
Defendant:
Changpeng Zhao, BAM Management US Holdings, Inc., T-Mobile USA, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-1704
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Julia Robinson, et al v. USA, et al
as 24-12513
Defendant:
SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, CIA, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Plaintiff:
KENDALL J. HALL and JULIA MAE ROBINSON
Gorsline v. T-Mobile Corporation
as 5:2024cv04071
Defendant:
T-Mobile Corporation
Plaintiff:
Steve P. Gorsline
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Martin v. AT&T Mobility, LLC
as 2:2024cv01417
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Martin
Defendant:
AT&T Mobility, LLC
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
Mackey v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts et al
as 1:2024cv11969
Defendant:
Harvard University, State of Texas, ESA P Portfolio Operating Lessee LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher Mackey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv11968
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
AGIS Software Development LLC v. AT&T Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv00602
Defendant:
AT&T Communications LLC, AT&T Inc., AT&T Mobility LLC and others
Plaintiff:
AGIS Software Development LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338 Patent Infringement
T-Mobile US v. KAIFI
as 24-40491
Plaintiff:
T-Mobile US Incorporated and T-Mobile USA, Incorporated
Defendant:
KAIFI, L.L.C.
Allen v. Cellco Partnership, et al.
as 24-4573
Defendant:
NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS PCS, LLC, doing business as AT&T Mobility, DISH WIRELESS LLC, CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, doing business as Verizon Wireless and others
Plaintiff:
HENRY ALLEN
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.
