Cases 1 - 10 of 322
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv05195
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Adam John MacKintosh v. Tim Cook et al
as 2:2024cv05854
Defendant:
Marc Lewis, Lewis and Llewellyn, LLP, Arturo Gonzales and others
Plaintiff:
Adam John MacKintosh
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
HARTENSTINE v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
as 1:2024cv01838
Defendant:
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Petitioner:
DANIEL O. HARTENSTINE
Cause Of Action: 09 U.S.C. § 1 U.S. Arbitration Act
Vinita Jayant v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
as 2:2024cv02962
Plaintiff:
Vinita Jayant
Defendant:
Uber Technologies, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Rebekka Lien v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
as 2:2024cv02961
Plaintiff:
Rebekka Lien
Defendant:
Uber Technologies, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Karla Uribe v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
as 2:2024cv02851
Plaintiff:
Karla Uribe
Defendant:
Uber Technologies, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
LBT IP II LLC v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
as 24-1526
Appellant:
LBT IP II LLC
Defendant / Appellee:
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
LBT IP II LLC v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
as 24-1457
Appellant:
LBT IP II LLC
Defendant / Appellee:
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Justin Mahwikizi v. Thomas M. Durkin
as 23-3369
Petitioner:
JUSTIN MAHWIKIZI
Respondent:
THOMAS M. DURKIN
Interested Party:
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and RASIER, LLC
Uber Technologies, Inc., et al. v. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
as 23-3445
Petitioner:
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., RASIER, LLC and RASIER-CA, LLC
Respondent:
UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
Not Classified By Court:
JANE DOE LS 340, an individual, KATHERINE HYLIN, an individual, E. R., an individual and others
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.
