Cases 21 - 30 of 36,739
Loeb & Loeb LLP v. Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. et al
as 2:2024mc00073
Petitioner:
Loeb & Loeb LLP
Respondent:
Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. and Unicorn Global, Inc.
Justin Lovelace v. AK Futures, LLC
as 8:2024cv01154
Plaintiff:
Justin Lovelace
Defendant:
AK Futures, LLC doing business as Cake
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Flores v. Rockwell Legal Group
as 4:2024cv03205
Plaintiff:
Jorge Flores
Defendant:
Rockwell Legal Group
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Nidal Khatib v. JMS Industries, LLC
as 5:2024cv01125
Defendant:
JMS Industries, LLC doing business as Canyon Legal Group, LLC also known as Jon Schulte & Associates, LLC and Jon Schulte & Associates, LLC
Plaintiff:
Nidal Khatib
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company v. Brian Yates
as 8:2024mc00011
Petitioner:
HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE COMPANY
Porter et al v. Meta Platforms, Inc., a Delaware Corporation
as 5:2024mc80081
Plaintiff:
Nakia Victoria Porter, Joe Berry Powell Jr, L. P. and others
Defendant:
Meta Platforms, Inc., a Delaware Corporation
Not Yet Classified:
Roy Stockton
Watkins, et al. v. Nurture, LLC, et al.
as 3:2024mc80131
Not Yet Classified:
Subpoena to Non-Party Jessica Rolph
Plaintiff:
Margaret Watkins and James D. Watkins
Defendant:
Nurture, LLC, Hain Celestial Group, Inc., Amazon.com Services LLC and others
Stephen Plotsker v. Envato Pty Ltd. et al
as 2:2024cv04412
Plaintiff:
Stephen Plotsker
Defendant:
Envato Pty Ltd. and Envato Elements Pty Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Maribel Cazares Guerrero v. Merrick Garland et al
as 2:2024cv04369
Plaintiff:
MARIBEL CAZARES GUERRERO
Defendant:
MERRICK GARLAND, Alexandro N Mayorkas, Director UR M JADDOU and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
