Cases 41 - 50 of 1,887
Meza. v. Ford Motor Company DO NOT DOCKET - Case transferred to McAllen.
as 1:2023cv00073
Plaintiff:
SANTIAGO MEZA JR. and Santiago Meza, Jr
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Meza. v. Ford Motor Company
as 7:2023cv00159
Plaintiff:
Santiago Meza, Jr
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Safe Driving Technologies LLC v. Ford Motor Company
as 23-1804
Appellant:
SAFE DRIVING TECHNOLOGIES LLC
Appellee:
FORD MOTOR COMPANY
Safe Driving Technologies LLC v. Ford Motor Company
as 23-1798
Appellant:
SAFE DRIVING TECHNOLOGIES LLC
Cross Appellant:
FORD MOTOR COMPANY
Rayes Rodriguez v. Ford Motor Company
as 3:2023cv00841
Plaintiff:
Miguel Rayes Rodriguez
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
ROSE v. Ford Motor Company
as 7:2023cv00053
Plaintiff:
DUSTIN ROSE
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Kimbrough v. Ford Motor Company
as 3:2023cv00055
Plaintiff:
David Kimbrough
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Llamas et al v. Ford Motor Company et al
as 3:2023cv00221
Plaintiff:
Cira Llamas and Eduardo Chavez Perea
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company and Doe 1 through Doe 10
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 1441 FHLB: Financial Inst Reform Receiving Enforcement Act 1989
In re: Ethanol Boosting Systems, LLC
as 23-119
Petitioner:
In re: ETHANOL BOOSTING SYSTEMS, LLC, MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY and KATHERINE K. VIDAL, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
Respondent:
FORD MOTOR COMPANY
Candon et al v. Ford Motor Company
as 1:2023cv00219
Plaintiff:
lee ann candon and charles candon
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty 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.
