Cases 1 - 10 of 33
Pacella v. Hesai Group et al
as 1:2024cv00876
Plaintiff:
Alan Pacella
Petitioner:
King Ho Wong and Michael Dee
Defendant:
Hesai Group, Yifan Li, Louis T. Hsieh and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77 Securities Fraud
Moradpour v. Velodyne Lidar, Inc. et al
as 3:2021cv01486
Plaintiff:
Meysam Moradpour, Diane Smith and William P. Smith
Defendant:
Andrew Hamer, Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Anand Gopalan and others
Petitioner:
Brandon Welu, John Whitney, Krista Buccholz and others
Wheeler v. Velodyne Lidar, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv01641
Plaintiff:
Jacob Wheeler
Defendant:
Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Virginia Boulet, Michael Dee and others
Carlisle v. Velodyne Lidar, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv10720
Plaintiff:
Samuel Carlisle
Defendant:
Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Virginia Boulet, Michael Dee and others
O'Dell v. Velodyne Lidar, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv10211
Plaintiff:
Ryan O'Dell
Defendant:
Velodyne Lidar, Inc., Virginia Boulet, Michael E. Dee and others
Han v. Otworth et al
as 1:2021cv01569
Plaintiff:
Han Byung-Gook and Byung-Gook Han
Defendant:
Michael Otworth, Richard Brenner, Tanya Burnell and others
Nominal Defendant:
PureCycle Technologies, Inc.
Claybrook v. Inovalon Holdings, Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv05665
Plaintiff:
Dee Claybrook
Defendant:
Inovalon Holdings, Inc., Keith R. Dunleavy, William J. Teuber, Jr. and others
Tennenbaum v. PureCycle Technologies, Inc. et al
as 6:2021cv00818
Plaintiff:
David Tennenbaum
Defendant:
Michael Otworth, Byron Roth, PureCycle Technologies, Inc. and others
Konder et al v. Culkin et al
as 1:2021cv00391
Defendant:
Andrew Hamer, James A. Graf, Anand Gopalan and others
Plaintiff:
Brandon Jordan and David Kondner
Nominal Defendant:
Velodyne Lidar, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
In Re Velodyne Lidar, Inc. Derivative Litigation
as 1:2021cv00369
Defendant:
Christopher A. Thomas, Andrew Hamer, James A. Graf and others
Nominal Defendant:
Velodyne Lidar, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Peter D'Arcy, David Kondner and Brandon Jordan
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.
