Cases 21 - 30 of 39
Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. v. Juoda Dvora et al
as 2:2016cv00206
Defendant:
Juoda Dvora and Tami Dvora
Plaintiff:
Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.
Canon U.S.A., Inc. v. Thuy Le et al
as 8:2015cv00938
Plaintiff:
Canon U.S.A., Inc.
Defendant:
Does, Thuy Le, Thanh P. Nguyen and others
Toyo Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd et al
as 8:2015cv00245
Movant:
TOYO TIRE U.S.A. CORP. and Toyo Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd
Toyo Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd. v. CIA Wheel Group, et al
as 8:2015cv00246
Plaintiff:
Toyo Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd.
Defendant:
CIA Wheel Group, Hong Kong Tri Ace Tire Co Ltd, Qingdao Doublestar Tire Industrial Co, Ltd and others
Counter Claimant:
Doublestar Group Corp
Counter Defendant:
Toyo Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd, Toyo Tire U.S.A. Corp. and Does 1-10
Cross Defendant:
Jinlin Ma
Special Master:
Hon. James P Gray
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
Deckers Outdoor Corporation v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv08988
Plaintiff:
Deckers Outdoor Corporation
Defendant:
Does and Skechers U.S.A., Inc.
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha et al v 4298322 Canada Inc.
as 2:2014cv08532
Defendant:
4298322 Canada Inc.
Plaintiff:
Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha and Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc.
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A. v. Burbank Kawasaki Inc, et al
as 8:2014cv00506
Plaintiff:
Kawasaki Motors Corp., U.S.A.
Defendant:
Leon Bellissimo, Burbank Kawasaki Inc and Does 1 through 10, Inclusive
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 44
KONAD U.S.A DISTRIBUTION et al v. AGG, INC et al
as 2:2014cv01538
Defendant:
AGG, INC, CANADA NAIL SUPPLIES, INC, DOES and others
Plaintiff:
KONAD COMPANY, LTD and KONAD U.S.A. DISTRIBUTION
Cels Enterprises, Inc. v. Viewmark U.S.A. Inc.
as 2:2011cv04706
Plaintiff:
Cels Enterprises, Inc.
Defendant:
Viewmark U.S.A. Inc.
Canon U.S.A., Inc. v. Wong et al
as 2:2011cv02701
Plaintiff:
Canon U.S.A., Inc.
Defendant:
Does and Danny Wong
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.
