Cases 31 - 40 of 44
Amos v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 2:2014cv03205
Plaintiff:
Rhonda Amos
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Amos v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 2:2014cv03162
Plaintiff:
Anita Amos
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Bond et al v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv33272
Plaintiff:
Naomi R. Bond and Jesse Amos Bond, Jr.
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. , Ethicon, LLC and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hicks v. Canterbury et al
as 2:2013cv27830
Plaintiff:
Amos Gabriel Hicks
Defendant:
Stephen D. Canterbury, Booker T. Stephens, Francine Spencer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Watkins et al v. American Medical Systems, Inc.
as 2:2013cv24398
Plaintiff:
Jennifer Amos Watkins and Robert Watkins
Defendant:
American Medical Systems, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Powell et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv16556
Plaintiff:
Anglia Manning Powell and Amos Powell, Jr.
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc. and Tissue Science Laboratories Limited
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Amos v. Oshel
as 2:2013cv04559
Plaintiff:
Roger Allen Amos
Defendant:
Paul William Oshel
Counter_claimant:
Paul William Oshel
Counter_defendant:
Roger Allen Amos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Amos v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv04376
Plaintiff:
Sylvia J. Amos
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. , Ethicon, LLC and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
United States of America vs. Amos
as 6:2013mc00001
Defendant:
Sara Amos
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 99 U.S.C. § 9999 Report cause code (DO NOT DELETE!)
Amos v. United States of America
as 1:2012cv04908
Plaintiff:
Wardell Amos
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671
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.
