Cases 11 - 20 of 30
Ramos v. Sweet Maple Cafe, LLC et al
as 1:2015cv01913
Plaintiff:
Jose Ramos
Defendant:
Sweet Maple Cafe, LLC and Laurene Joy Hynson
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Ramos Diaz v. Alpha Acrylic Design, Inc. et al
as 1:2015cv01242
Plaintiff:
Francisco Ramos Diaz
Defendant:
Alpha Acrylic Design, Inc. and Philip BR Liu
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act
DiPaola et al v. Walgreen Co
as 1:2014cv07570
Plaintiff:
Anthony DiPaola , Lori Kingery , Mike Lhotka and others
Defendant:
Walgreen Co
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Ramos et al v. Structural Preservation Systems, LLC
as 1:2014cv05444
Plaintiff:
Arturo Ramos and Gaspar Paramo
Defendant:
Structural Preservation Systems, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Reyes et al v. I-Kor Design, Inc. et al
as 1:2014cv02367
Plaintiff:
Maria Reyes , Maria Flores , Norma Herrera and others
Defendant:
I-Kor Design, Inc. and GearXS, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Ramos v. Las Asadas, Inc. et al
as 1:2013cv04580
Plaintiff:
Juan M. Ramos
Defendant:
Las Asadas, Inc. and Rosa E. Bucio
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
Medina et al v. Active Roofing Company, Inc. et al
as 1:2012cv04658
Plaintiff:
Sergio Medina , Jose Laguna , Mauricio Sanchez and others
Defendant:
Active Roofing Company, Inc. and Joseph Carolan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Cosentino et al v. Transcend Services, Inc.
as 1:2012cv03627
Plaintiff:
Sandra L. Zier-Teitler, Margaret E. Mackey, Denese Dugay and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Slater v. Total Security Management Inc. et al
as 1:2012cv00701
Plaintiff:
Ben Slater
Defendant:
Total Security Management Inc. and Bernadette Ramos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Ramos et al v. Labor Solutions, LLC
as 1:2011cv04975
Plaintiff:
Michelle Ramos , Juana Cuellar and Elihu Ochoa
Defendant:
Labor Solutions, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
