Cases 1 - 10 of 36
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00174
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
United States of America v. Dinh et al
as 8:2020cv01794
Defendant:
Thu Phan Dinh doing business as "www.zerostore.site", Nguyen Duy Toan doing business as "www.zerostore.site", Tran Khanh doing business as "www.zerostore.site" and others
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1345
Phan, et al. v. Federal Insurance Company
as 8:2019cv01106
Plaintiff:
nhan phan and nhung nong
Defendant:
Federal Insurance Company
Not Yet Classified:
Peter J. Grilli
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2017cv01633
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Maxum Indemnity Company v. Wagon Wheel Flea Market, Inc. et al
as 8:2016cv00785
Plaintiff:
Maxum Indemnity Company
Defendant:
Wagon Wheel Flea Market, Inc. and Thong Thi Phan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Phan v. Hiro & Michael, Inc. et al
as 8:2015cv00783
Plaintiff:
Tai Phan
Defendant:
Hiro & Michael, Inc. , Michael Chan and DVGV Investments, LLC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2014cv00146
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
Phan et al v. Retrieval-Masters Creditors Bureau, Inc.
as 3:2014cv00109
Plaintiff:
Tuyen Phan and Michael Phan
Defendant:
Retrieval-Masters Creditors Bureau, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Phan v. Credit Control Services, Inc.
as 3:2014cv00083
Plaintiff:
Michael Phan
Defendant:
Credit Control Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
Phan v. Covergent Outsourcing, Inc.
as 3:2014cv00084
Plaintiff:
Michael Phan
Defendant:
Covergent Outsourcing, Inc.
Cause Of Action: Restrictions on Use of Telephone Equipment
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.
