Cases 41 - 50 of 120
Hanson v. Noch et al
as 3:2019cv01326
Defendant:
Does 1 - 10, Brazy Records LLC, Vito Michael Roppo and others
Plaintiff:
Theo Hanson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Walker v. Arpaio et al
as 2:2019cv04554
Defendant:
Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, Vincent Companaro and Joseph M Arpaio
Plaintiff:
Theo Walker, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Noch v. Independent Film Development Corp. (IFLM) et al
as 3:2019cv01327
Defendant:
Theo Hanson and Independent Film Development Corp. (IFLM)
Plaintiff:
Jake Noch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2019cv03502
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Theo Lubbe v. Dealer Spike, LLC et al
as 8:2019cv00694
Plaintiff:
Theo Lubbe
Defendant:
Dealer Spike, LLC and Mike Thompson Recreational Vehicles
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501
Theos Medical Systems, Inc. v. Nytone Medical Products, Inc.
as 5:2019cv01092
Defendant:
Nytone Medical Products, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Theos Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
Theo Lubbe v. Pacific Coachworks, Inc.
as 5:2018cv01839
Plaintiff:
Theo Lubbe
Defendant:
Pacific Coachworks, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501
Malem Medical, Ltd., et al v. Theos Medical Systems, Inc., et al
as 18-16670
Plaintiff - Appellee:
MALEM MEDICAL, LTD., a United Kingdom corporation and ENURESIS ASSOCIATES, LLC, a Maryland limited liability company
Defendant - Appellant:
THEOS MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. and SAKET BHATIA
Theo Tinson v. Donald Trump et al
as 2:2018cv07187
Plaintiff:
Theo Tinson, Jr.
Defendant:
Department of Corrections and Rehab, Riverside County Sheriffs Department, Governor Jerry Brown and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Theo Tinson Jr. v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations
as 2:2018cv07189
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations
Plaintiff:
Theo Tinson, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
