Cases 11 - 20 of 20
United States of America v. Chung (Kwok)
as 16-3203
Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant:
Chen I. Chung, Siu Man Wong, Tung Tran and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Roger Kwok
United States of America v. Chung (Kwok)
as 16-3203
Appellee USA:
United States of America
Defendant:
Chen I. Chung, Siu Man Wong, Tung Tran and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Roger Kwok
Chan v. United States of America
as 14-861
Petitioner - Appellant:
Brian Chan
Respondent - Appellee:
United States of America
Chan v. United States of America
as 14-456
Petitioner:
Brian Chan
Respondent:
United States of America
Chan v. United States of America
as 1:2012cv04349
Petitioner:
Brian Chan
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Chan v. United States of America
as 11-2152
Petitioner:
Brian Chan
Respondent:
United States of America
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv01420
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Orteck International, Incorpor v. Transpacific Tire & Wheel, Inc
as 10-1484
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ORTECK INTERNATIONAL, INCORPORATED, a Maryland Corporation and VENETIAN INVESTMENTS, LLC, a Maryland Limited Liability Company
Defendant - Appellee:
TRANSPACIFIC TIRE & WHEEL, INCORPORATED, a California Corporation, GITI TIRE CHINA, a/k/a Grandtour Tire China, An Alien Corporation, BRIAN CHAN, an Individual and others
Siddi Jon v. Washington Mutual Bank
as 08-1701
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SIDDI JON
Defendant - Appellee:
WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, BRIAN CHAN, PROFESSIONAL CHOICE, INCORPORATED and others
LQJ Global Tire Inc v. Brian Chan et al
as 2:2007cv04334
Plaintiff:
LQJ Global Tire Inc
Defendant:
Brian Chan, Global Tire & Wheel Inc and Does
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham 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.
