Cases 11 - 17 of 17
Chegg, Inc. v. Doe
as 3:2018cv07194
Defendant:
JOHN DOE
Plaintiff:
Chegg, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
Kurland v. Chegg, Inc. et al
as 3:2018cv06714
Defendant:
Chegg, Inc., Daniel Rosensweig and Andrew Brown
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Kurland
Shah v. Chegg, Inc. et al
as 3:2018cv05956
Defendant:
Chegg, Inc. and Daniel Rosensweig
Plaintiff:
Bhupendra V. Shah
In Re: Elaine Duke
as 17-3345
Petitioner:
Elaine C. Duke, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security, Jefferson B. Sessions III, United States Attorney General, Donald J. Trump, President of the United States and others
Respondent:
Martin Jonathan Batall Vidal, Make the Road New York, Antonio Alarcon and others
Amicus Curiae:
City of Los Angeles, California, City of Austin, Texas, City of Boston, Massachusetts and others
Movant:
6Sense Insights, Inc., A Medium Corporation, Adobe Systems Incorporated and others
In Re: Kirstjen M. Nielsen
as 17-3345
Petitioner:
Kevin McAleenan, Secretary of Homeland Security, Jefferson B. Sessions III, United States Attorney General, Donald J. Trump, President of the United States and others
Respondent:
Martin Jonathan Batall Vidal, Make the Road New York, Antonio Alarcon and others
Amicus Curiae:
City of Los Angeles, California, City of Austin, Texas, City of Boston, Massachusetts and others
Chegg Inc v. Hydrick et al
as 2:2017cv00127
Plaintiff:
Chegg Inc
Defendant:
Christopher Lance Hydrick , Brad Hagen and Three-Two Marketing
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1836
County of Santa Clara v. Donald J. Trump et al
as 3:2017cv00574
Plaintiff:
County of Santa Clara
Defendant:
Donald J. Trump, Dana J. Boente, Mark Sandy and others
Amicus Curiae:
LifeMoves, City of Salinas, Administrative Law Professors and others
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Young Women's Christian Association of Silicon Valley
Intervenor Defendant:
Kuang-Bao P. Ou-Young
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
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.
