Cases filed in the Ninth Circuit Courts
Cases 11 - 20 of 329
Flextronics International USA, v. Panasonic Corporation, et al
as 22-15231
Plaintiff / Appellant: FLEXTRONICS INTERNATIONAL USA, INC.
Defendant / Appellee: PANASONIC CORPORATION, PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA, PANASONIC ELECTRONIC DEVICES CO. LTD. and others
Defendant: MURATA MANUFACTURING CO., LTD., MURATA ELECTRONICS NORTH AMERICA, INC., MURATA POWER SOLUTIONS, INC. and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2022cv00032
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Panasonic Corporation of North America v. Powertree Services, Inc. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2021cv01012
Defendant: Danlin Corporation, Powertree Services, Inc. and Powertree San Francisco One, LLC
Plaintiff: PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
In re: Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs, et al v. Panasonic Corporation, et al
as 21-15200
Defendant: LG CHEM, LTD., SONY ENERGY DEVICES CORPORATION, MAXWELL CORPORATION OF AMERICA and others
Plaintiff / Appellant: INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS
Appellee: CHRISTOPHER ANDREWS, STEVEN FRANKLYN HELFAND and MICHAEL FRANK BEDNARZ
Not Classified By Court: In re: LITHIUM ION BATTERIES ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs, et al v. Panasonic Corporation, et al
as 21-15022
Defendant / Appellee: LG CHEM, LTD., SANYO NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION, SAMSUNG SDI AMERICA, INC. and others
Appellant: STEVEN FRANKLYN HELFAND
Plaintiff / Appellee: INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS
Not Classified By Court: In re: LITHIUM ION BATTERIES ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs v. Toshiba Corporation, et al
as 20-16699
Petitioner / Appellant: HARRY GARAVANIAN, CHRIS SEUFERT, KERRY MURPHY and others
Defendant / Appellee: TOSHIBA AMERICA CONSUMER PRODUCTS, LLC, PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA, SAMSUNG SDI (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD and others
Plaintiff / Appellee: INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS
Not Classified By Court: In re: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
In re: Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs v. Toshiba Corporation, et al
as 20-16691
Petitioner / Appellant: STEVEN HARRELSON, WALKER, WARREN & WATKINS, LLC, DONNA MUCCINO and others
Defendant / Appellee: TOSHIBA AMERICA CONSUMER PRODUCTS, LLC, PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA, SAMSUNG SDI (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD and others
Plaintiff / Appellee: INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS
Not Classified By Court: In re: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
In re: Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs v. Toshiba Corporation, et al
as 20-16684
Defendant / Appellee: TOSHIBA AMERICA CONSUMER PRODUCTS, LLC, PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA, SAMSUNG SDI (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD and others
Plaintiff / Appellee: INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS
Not Classified By Court: In re: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Petitioner / Appellant: OMITTED REPEALER STATE INDIRECT-PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS, Proposed Intervenors
In re: Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs, et al v. Toshiba Corporation, et al
as 20-16686
Defendant / Appellee: TOSHIBA AMERICA CONSUMER PRODUCTS, LLC, PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA, HITACHI DISPLAYS, LTD., AKA Japan Display, Inc. and others
Plaintiff / Appellee: INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS
Appellant: DAVID N. WATSON, JESSICA M. MCINTYRE, ERIC R. COGGINS and others
Not Classified By Court: In re: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
In re: Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs v. Toshiba Corporation, et al
as 20-16685
Defendant / Appellee: TOSHIBA AMERICA CONSUMER PRODUCTS, LLC, PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA, SAMSUNG SDI (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD and others
Plaintiff / Appellee: INDIRECT PURCHASER PLAINTIFFS
Not Classified By Court: In re: CATHODE RAY TUBE (CRT) ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Petitioner / Appellant: ELEANOR LEWIS, Proposed Intervenor

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.


Why Is My Information Online?