Cases 41 - 50 of 229
Karma Automotive LLC v. de Vries et al
as 4:2022cv02644
Plaintiff:
Karma Automotive LLC
Defendant:
Joost de Vries, Alan Yuan, Troy Beetz and others
Prasad v. Commonwealth of Virginia
as 3:2022cv00429
Plaintiff:
Sundari Karma Prasad
Defendant:
Commonwealth of Virginia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Incorrectly Filed
as 4:2022cv02461
Plaintiff:
Karma Automotive LLC
Defendant:
Joost de Vries, Alan Yuan, Troy Beetz and others
In Re: PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC et al
as 5:2018md02834
Defendant:
PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC et al, Airbnb, Inc., Stitchfix, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Level 3 Communications, LLC, PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC, Amazon.com, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
BENIDT INVESTMENTS/SLINGER, LLC v. ZAKIN et al
as 9:2022cv80761
Plaintiff:
BENIDT INVESTMENTS/SLINGER, LLC
Defendant:
CHAD SCOTT ZAKIN, KARMA OF PALM BEACH, INC., AUTO WHOLESALE OF BOCA LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Brown v. National Bank of Pakistan
as 22-1352
Plaintiff:
Brianna N. Benson
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Harold Brown, Sr., Barbara Brown, Paula Rich and others
Defendant / Appellee:
National Bank of Pakistan
Smith v. Caffey et al
as 4:2022cv00465
Plaintiff:
DeQuincy Smith
Defendant:
Ahmari Caffey, Head, Maurice Culclager and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Be Labs, Inc. v. Karma Mobility Inc.
as 1:2022cv00612
Plaintiff:
Be Labs, Inc.
Defendant:
Karma Mobility Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
Sherpa v. Garland
as 21-6453
Petitioner:
KARMA SHERPA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv00020
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
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.
