Cases 1 - 10 of 138
United States of America v. Haapaniemi
as 24-3161
Defendant:
BJORN ERIK HAAPANIEMI, Peter Lee Norris and Peter Lee Bjorn Norris
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Charman v. The Hardship Department LLC. et al
as 3:2024cv00400
Plaintiff:
Thane Charman
Defendant:
The Hardship Department LLC. and Stephen Norris
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Norris v. Dulgov
as 24-57
Petitioner / Appellant:
WEBSTER WAYNE NORRIS, III
Respondent / Appellee:
A. H. DULGOV, Warden
Norris v. Stonebreaker
as 23-3941
Petitioner:
JOHN FOSTER NORRIS
Respondent:
DONNIE STONEBREAKER, JR.
Norris v. Stonebreaker
as 23-3753
Petitioner:
JOHN FOSTER NORRIS
Respondent:
DONNIE STONEBREAKER, JR., WARDEN
Justin Rivlin v. Brian Kabot et al
as 2:2023cv03120
Plaintiff:
Justin Rivlin
Defendant:
Stable Road Acquisition Corp., Brian Kabot, James Norris and others
Haapaniemi v. United States of America
as 22-998
Petitioner:
BJORN ERIK HAAPANIEMI, Peter Lee Norris and Peter Lee Bjorn Norris
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
In re Stable Road Acquisition Corp. Securities Litigation
as 2:2021cv05744
Plaintiff:
Keith Jensen
Defendant:
Stable Road Acquisition Corp., Momentus Inc., SRC NI Holdings, LLC and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Martin Hall and Drew Depoy
Petitioner:
Dave Durocher, Paul Meozzi, James Cramer and others
IN RE: PACKAGED SEAFOOD PRODUCTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION
as 3:2015md02670
Plaintiff:
Truyen Ton-Vuong, Steven Kratky, Melissa Bowman and others
Defendant:
Big Catch Cayman LP, Dongwon Enterprises Co. Ltd., Chicken of the Sea International, Inc. and others
Not Classified By Court:
Non-Party Costco Wholesale Corporation, Lion Capital LLP and Christopher Lischewski
Intervenor Plaintiff:
United States Department of Justice
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Affiliated Foods Plaintiffs
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0001 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
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.
