Cases 31 - 40 of 1,363
Watts, et al. v. United States of America, et al.
as 23-3723
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD ALLAN WATTS and LINDSAY LOPEZ
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS and others
Watts, et al. v. United States of America, et al.
as 23-3666
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EDWARD ALLAN WATTS and LINDSAY LOPEZ
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS and others
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. OMNICARE, INC. et al
as 1:2011cv01326
Plaintiff:
THE STATE OF INDIANA, THE STATE OF GEORGIA, THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY and others
Defendant:
PHARMERICA CORPORATION, NCS HEALTHCARE, INC., NEIGHBORCARE, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
US, et al v. American Airlines Group Inc.
as 23-1802
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES, STATE OF ARIZONA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA and others
Defendant / Appellant:
AMERICAN AIRLINES GROUP, INC. and AMERICAN AIRLINES GROUP INC.
Defendant:
JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORPORATION
Interested Party:
UNITED AIRLINES, INC., DELTA AIR LINES, INC., GLEN HAUENSTEIN and others
Buckeye Power, Inc., et al v. EPA, et al
as 23-1317
Petitioner:
Buckeye Power, Inc. and Ohio Valley Electric Corporation
Respondent:
Environmental Protection Agency and Michael S. Regan, Administrator, United States Environmental Agency
Intervenor:
Appalachian Mountain Club, Ohio Environmental Council and Sierra Club
Amicus Curiae:
District of Columbia, New York City, State of Connecticut and others
United States of America ex rel. Mary Bixler Wood v. Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc.
as 23-7468
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARY BIXLER WOOD
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel Mary Bixler Wood, ALASKA, ex rel. Mary Bixler Wood, CALIFORNIA, ex rel. Mary Bixler Wood and others
Defendant / Appellee:
SIEMENS MEDICAL SOLUTIONS USA, INC., SIEMENS HEALTHCARE DIAGNOSTICS, INC. and SIEMENS HEALTHCARE DIAGNOSTICS PRODUCTS GMBH
State Of New York et al v. Donald Trump et al
as 1:2017cv05228
Plaintiff:
State of North Carolina, State of Washington, State of New Mexico and others
Defendant:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States of America, Donald Trump and others
Amicus Curiae:
The Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County (LASSMC), Service Employees International Union, African Services Committee and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
State of Ohio, et al v. EPA, et al
as 22-1081
Petitioner:
State of Ohio, State of Alabama, State of Arkansas and others
Respondent:
Environmental Protection Agency and Michael S. Regan, in his official capacity as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Intervenor:
State of California, State of Colorado, State of Connecticut and others
Amicus Curiae:
The Two Hundred for Housing Equity, Americans for Tax Reform, American Commitment and others
Not Yet Classified:
ConservAmerica
State of Missouri v. Biden
as 23-30445
Plaintiff / Appellee:
State of Missouri, State of Louisiana, Aaron Kheriaty and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Joseph R. Biden, Jr., Vivek H. Murthy, Xavier Becerra and others
Amicus Curiae:
Children's Health Defense, Leland Stanford Junior University, Electronic Frontier Foundation and others
Arizona, State of et al v. Michael D Lansky LLC et al
as 4:2023cv00233
Plaintiff:
Arizona, State of, Alabama, State of, Arkansas, State of and others
Defendant:
Michael D Lansky LLC an Arizona limited liability company doing business as Avid Telecom, Michael D Lansky individually as a Member/Manager/Chief Executive Officer of Michael D Lansky LLC doing business as Avid Telecom and Stacy S Reeves individually as a Manager/Vice President of Michael D Lansky LLC doing business as Avid Telecom
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
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.
