Antitrust Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Federal Trade Commission et al v. Methodist Le Bonheur Healthcare et al
as 2:2020cv02835
Plaintiff: State of Tennessee Office of the Attorney General and Reporter and Federal Trade Commission
Defendant: Tenet Healthcare Corporation and Methodist Le Bonheur Healthcare
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1337
STATE OF FLORIDA, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS v. GENERAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION et al
as 2:2017cv00384
Defendant: GENERAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION, GENERAL CHEMICAL LLC, GENTEK INC. and others
Plaintiff: STATE OF FLORIDA, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General v. Cerberus Institutional Partners V, L.P. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2015cv00176
Defendant: AB Acquisition LLC, Cerberus Institutional Partners V, L.P. and Safeway Inc.
702) 486-3283 (fax: State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 25 Clayton Act
State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs v. Hitachi-LG Data Storage, Inc. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2013cv01877
Plaintiff: State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs
Defendant: Hitachi-LG Data Storage, Inc. and Hitachi-LG Data Storage, Korea, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15 Antitrust Litigation
State of Florida et al v. LG Electronics, Inc. et al
as 4:2011cv06205
Plaintiff: State of Florida , Office of the Attorney General and Department of Legal Affairs
Defendant: LG Electronics, Inc., LG Eletronics U.S.A., Inc., LG Electronics Taiwan Taipei Co., Ltd. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15
State of Florida et al v. LG Electronics, Inc. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2011cv06205
Plaintiff: State of Florida , Office of the Attorney General and Department of Legal Affairs
Defendant: LG Electronics, Inc., LG Eletronics U.S.A., Inc., LG Electronics Taiwan Taipei Co., Ltd. and others
Pecial_master: Charles A. Legge
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15
State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs v. AU Optronics Corporation et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2010cv03517
Plaintiff: State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, Department of Legal Affairs
Defendant: AU Optronics Corporation, AU Optronics Corporation America, Chimei Innolux Corp. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 25
In Re: Optical Disk Drive Products Antitrust Litigation
as 3:2010md02143
Plaintiff: Acer America Corporation, Acer Inc., Alex Afanasyev and others
Defendant: BenQ America Corp., BenQ Corporation, Hitachi, Ltd. and others
Petitioner: John Doe 1 and Best Buy Enterprise Services, Inc.
Other: Christopher Andrews, Debbie Bosse, Mr. Stephen Field and others
Not Yet Classified: All Parties, Amazon.com, Inc. and Apple Inc.
Intervenor: Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology and U.S. Department of J Antitrust Division
Interested Party: Patrick S. Sweeney, Gregory Starrett and Newegg Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
VIBO Corporation, Inc. v. Jack Conway, et al
as 10-5043
Plaintiff / Appellant: VIBO CORPORATION, INC., dba General Tobacco
Defendant / Appellee: JACK CONWAY, in his official capacity as Attorney General, Commonwealth of Kentucky, TROY KING, in his official capacity as Attorney General, State of Alabama, TALIS J. COLBERT, in his official capacity as Attorney General, State of Alaska and others
VIBO Corporation, Inc. v. Jack Conway, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 10-5043
Plaintiff - Appellant: VIBO CORPORATION, INC., dba General Tobacco
Defendant - Appellee: JACK CONWAY, in his official capacity as Attorney General, Commonwealth of Kentucky, TROY KING, in his official capacity as Attorney General, State of Alabama, TALIS J. COLBERT, in his official capacity as Attorney General, State of Alaska 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.


Why Is My Information Online?