Cases 151 - 160 of 135,104
In re Naturalization Ceremony 06/05/24
as 5:2024mc80135
Not Yet Classified:
Eunice Apalis Alejandro, Maria Montserrat Riojas Moreno, Thu Thanh Minh Nguyen and others
Alexander v. Chime
as 3:2024cv00979
Plaintiff:
Liam Alexander
Defendant:
Chime
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 bc Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00969
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
The People of the State of California v. Coast Runner Industries Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv00971
Plaintiff:
The People of the State of California
Defendant:
Coast Runner Industries Inc., Ghost Gunner, Inc. and Defense Distributed
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 nr Diversity-Notice of Removal
Ewing v. Rowe et al
as 3:2024cv00974
Plaintiff:
Anton A. Ewing
Defendant:
Jordyn Rowe and Gold Medal Funding, LLC
Experian Information Solutions Inc, an Ohio corporation v. Stein Saks, PLLC et al
as 8:2024cv01186
Plaintiff:
Experian Information Solutions Inc, an Ohio corporation
Defendant:
Stein Saks, PLLC, Judah Stein, Yaakov Saks and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Piyushbhai D. Patel v. Naresh Patel et al
as 2:2024cv04633
Plaintiff:
Piyushbhai D. Patel
Defendant:
Naresh Patel, Tejal Patel, Fairview Hospitality, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Haoying Zhang v. BF SUMA Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv04746
Plaintiff:
Haoying Zhang
Defendant:
BF SUMA Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv04599
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv04624
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
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.
