Cases filed in the Ninth Circuit Courts
Cases 1 - 10 of 38
United States of America v. 354 Units, more or less, of an article labeled as ELF BAR EB Design Airo Max Disposable (5000 Puffs) in various flavors, ET AL.
as 2:2024cv02772
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant: 354 UNITS, MORE OR LESS, OF AN ARTICLE LABELED AS ELF BAR EB DESIGN AIRO MAX DISPOSABLE (5000 PUFFS) IN VARIOUS FLAVORS, ET AL., 354 Units, more or less, of an article labeled as ELF BAR EB Design Airo Max Disposable (5000 Puffs) in various flavors, Elf Bar EB Design BC5000 Vape Disposables (5000 Puff) in Various Flavors and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 0981 Civil Forfeiture
Unknown Plaintiff v. 354 UNITS, MORE OR LESS, OF AN ARTICLE LABELED AS ELF BAR EB DESIGN AIRO MAX DISPOSABLE (5000 PUFFS) IN VARIOUS FLAVORS, ET AL.
as 2:2024cv02767
Defendant: 354 UNITS, MORE OR LESS, OF AN ARTICLE LABELED AS ELF BAR EB DESIGN AIRO MAX DISPOSABLE (5000 PUFFS) IN VARIOUS FLAVORS, ET AL.
Plaintiff: Unknown Plaintiff
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 0981 Civil Forfeiture
Richardson v. Bellinger
as 24-1844
Plaintiff: GREGORY RICHARDSON
Defendant: MARTHA BELLINGER, in her capacity as the Temporary Judge pursuant to Article VI 21 of the California Constitution,
Zinus, Inc. et al v. Foshan Aiyi Family Article Co., Ltd. et al
as 8:2024cv00247
Plaintiff: Zinus, Inc. and Zinus USA Inc.
Defendant: Foshan Aiyi Family Article Co., Ltd., Foshan Aiyi Household Products Co., Ltd., Tong Li Pu Foam Mattress Co., Ltd. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
USA vs. Nine, more or less, 50-pound permeable triple layer brown paper bags, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2023cv01954
Plaintiff: United States of America
Defendant: Nine, more or less, 50-pound permeable triple layer brown paper bags, of an article of food, Thirty-eight, more or less, 55-pound permeable white plastic woven bags, of an article of food, Forty-four, more or less, 55-pound permeable white plastic woven bags, of an article of food and others
Claimant: Gold Coast Distributors, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Complaint for Forfeiture
Harjit Bhambra v. Susan Illston, et al
as 23-15324
Plaintiff / Appellant: HARJIT BHAMBRA
Defendant / Appellee: SUSAN YVONNE ILLSTON, in her Personal and Official Capacities as an United States Article III Fedearl and U.S. Senior District Judge for the Northern California, EDWARD MILTON CHEN, in his Personal and Official Capacities as an United States Article III Federal and U.S. District Judge for the Northern California, U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA and others
Gregory Richardson v. USDC-CARIV
as 22-70077
Not Classified By Court: In re: GREGORY RICHARDSON, FIRST CENTENNIAL MORTGAGE CORPORATION, DANE MCCLAIN and others
Petitioner: GREGORY RICHARDSON
Respondent: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE
Tee Turtle, LLC v. Anhui Leadershow Household Industrial Co., Ltd. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2021cv04703
Defendant: Shantou Chenghai XTH Toys Co., Ltd., Dongguan Chcc Tech Co., Ltd., Xiamen Glorystar Import and Export Co., Ltd. and others
Plaintiff: Tee Turtle, LLC
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Frederick Banks v. Trump Articles of Impeachment et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2021cv01042
Respondent: Sekou Maat, Trump Articles of Impeachment, US Senate and others
Petitioner: Frederick Banks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Alan U. Schwartz v. Paramount Pictures Corporation et al
as 2:2020cv11470
Plaintiff: ALAN U. SCHWARTZ, TRUSTEE OF THE TRUST UNDER ARTICLE THREE OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF TRUMAN CAPOTE DATED MAY 4, 1981 and Alan U. Schwartz
Defendant: PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION and Does 1 through 100, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441

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?