Cases 11 - 20 of 22
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv00666
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12117
Pro Stage Gear, LLC v. Guangzhou Rantion Trading Co., Ltd. et al (JRG1)
as 1:2017cv00030
Plaintiff:
Pro Stage Gear, LLC
Defendant:
Guangzhou Rantion Trading Co., Ltd., Donner Technology LLC, Jet Star Express, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Hitt v. Vericlaim, Inc. et al
as 3:2015cv01133
Plaintiff:
Anthony Hitt
Defendant:
Vericlaim, Inc., Iron Horse Recovery, LLC, Yuan Tai Furniture, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
D&S Remodelers, Inc. v. The Foundry at Hunters Point Condominiums et al
as 3:2015cv00059
Plaintiff:
D&S Remodelers, Inc.
Defendant:
The Foundry at Hunters Point Condominiums, Board of Managers of the Foundry at Hunters Point Condominiums, Jennifer M. McCarthy and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Martichuski et al v. Wu et al [TV2]
as 3:2014cv00292
Plaintiff:
John Martichuski and JMI, Inc.
Defendant:
David Hui Wu, Bobby Chen Sabas and Hospitality International Group, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2013cv02250
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Menchu v. Chen et al
as 3:2012cv00950
Plaintiff:
Edwin Menchu
Defendant:
Hung Chen, August Moon of Brentwood, Inc. and Madison Bullwings, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv00069
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Chanel, Inc. v. Chen et al
as 2:2010cv02571
Plaintiff:
Chanel, Inc.
Defendant:
Ada Chen and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
Chanel, Inc. v. Chen et al
as 2:2010cv02449
Plaintiff:
Chanel, Inc.
Defendant:
Xiaoli Chen and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
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.
