Cases 21 - 30 of 31
IMDb.com, Inc. v. Harris
as 3:2016cv06535
Plaintiff:
IMDb.com, Inc.
Defendant:
Kamala Harris
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
The Shipman Agency, Inc. v. IMDB.com, Inc.
as 4:2017cv03087
Plaintiff:
The Shipman Agency, Inc.
Defendant:
IMDB.com, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
Bank v. IMDB.COM, Inc.
as 1:2017cv05240
Plaintiff:
Joseph Bank
Defendant:
IMDB.COM, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Shaul v. IMDB.COM, Inc.
as 1:2017cv02539
Plaintiff:
Zelig Shaul
Defendant:
IMDB.COM, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Peter Kredenser v. Amazon.Com. Inc et al
as 2:2017cv00690
Defendant:
Amazon.Com. Inc and IMDB.Com. Inc
Plaintiff:
Peter Kredenser
Huong Hoang v. Amazon.com Inc., et al
as 13-35390
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HUONG HOANG, an individual
Defendant - Appellee:
AMAZON.COM INC., a Delaware corporation and IMDB.COM INC, a Delaware corporation
Doe v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al
as 2:2011cv01709
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
Amazon.com Inc and IMDB.com Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CyberFone Systems LLC v. CNN Interactive Group Inc. et al
as 1:2011cv00829
Defendant:
CNN Interactive Group Inc. , ESPN, Inc., CBS Interactive Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
CyberFone Systems LLC
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145
Alexander v. Murdoch
as 11-4291
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Martin Alexander
Defendant:
News Corporation, Inc., a corporation and ABC, Inc., and Affiliates, wholly owned Subsidiary of The Walt Disney Co., Inc., a corporation
Defendant - Appellee:
Keith Rupert Murdoch, Officer, owner New Corportion, Inc., Disney Enterprises, Inc., Fox Entertainment Group, Inc., wholly owned subsidiary of News Corp, Inc. a corporation and others
Rovi Corporation et al v. Amazon.Com Inc. et al
as 1:2011cv00003
Plaintiff:
Rovi Corporation , Rovi Guides Inc. , United Video Properties Inc. and others
Defendant:
Amazon.Com Inc. and IMDB.Com, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
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.
