Cases 21 - 28 of 28
Wiggins v. Asbestos Defendants (B P) et al
as 4:2007cv01322
Defendant:
Asbestos Defendants (B P), The Boeing Company, Bridgestone Firestone North American Tire, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Charlie Wiggins
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442
DANA CORP V AMERICAN AXLE
as 04-1116
Defendant-Appellee:
AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING, INC.
Plaintiff-Appellant:
DANA CORPORATION
KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME V DANA CORP
as 02-1256
Defendant-Appellant:
DANA CORPORATION, DANA CORPORATION, DANA CORPORATION and others
KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME V DANA CORP
as 02-1221
Defendant-Appellant:
DANA CORPORATION, DANA CORPORATION, DANA CORPORATION and others
KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME V DANA CORP
as 01-1376
Defendant-Appellant:
DANA CORPORATION, HALDEX BRAKE PRODUCTS AB, HALDEX BRAKE PRODUCTS CORPORATION and others
Plaintiff-Cross Appellant:
KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME FUER NUTZFAHRZEUGE GMBH, KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME FUER NUTZFAHRZEUGE GMBH and KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME FUER NUTZFAHRZEUGE GMBH
KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME V DANA CORP
as 01-1357
Amicus Curiae:
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, AMERICAN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW ASSOCIATION, APPLERA CORPORATION and others
Defendant-Appellant:
DANA CORPORATION, HALDEX BRAKE PRODUCTS AB, HALDEX BRAKE PRODUCTS CORPORATION and others
Plaintiff-Cross Appellant:
KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME FUER NUTZFAHRZEUGE GMBH, KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME FUER NUTZFAHRZEUGE GMBH and KNORR-BREMSE SYSTEME FUER NUTZFAHRZEUGE GMBH
MCLAREN PERFORMANCE V DANA CORP
as 01-1270
Defendant-Appellee:
DANA CORPORATION, DANA CORPORATION and DANA CORPORATION
Plaintiff-Appellant:
MCLAREN PERFORMANCE TECHNOLOGIES, MCLAREN PERFORMANCE TECHNOLOGIES and MCLAREN PERFORMANCE TECHNOLOGIES
DANA CORP V AMERICAN AXLE
as 01-1008
Defendant-Appellee:
AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING, INC., AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING, INC. and AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING, INC.
Plaintiff-Appellant:
DANA CORPORATION, DANA CORPORATION and DANA CORPORATION
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.
