Cases filed in Pennsylvania
Cases 51 - 60 of 156
NGUYEN v. TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC. et al
as 2:2018cv01331
Plaintiff: HOA NGUYEN
Defendant: TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC. , TAKATA CORPORATION, TK HOLDINGS, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1334
Nguyen v. Richards
as 3:2018cv00351
Plaintiff: Thu Nguyen
Defendant: Dana Richards
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
NGUYEN v. HOLDING ACQUISITION CO. LP We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2018cv00156
Plaintiff: HONG M. NGUYEN
Defendant: HOLDING ACQUISITION CO. LP
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv00536
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv02014
Petitioner: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv01259
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SHMUELY et al v. TRANSDERMAL SPECIALTIES, INC. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2017cv01684
Plaintiff: YOCHEVED SHMUELY , YONI DULITZKI , DEBRA S. HACKETT and others
Defendant: TRANSDERMAL SPECIALTIES, INC., BRUCE K. REDDING, JR., BRUCE K. REDDING, JR. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TRUST and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
ACOSTA v. BARTASH PRINTING, INC. et al
as 2:2017cv01446
Defendant: TROY NGUYEN, BARTASH PRINTING, INC. and VQ MANAGEMENT, INC.
Plaintiff: R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
WALKER v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2017cv00115
Plaintiff: FRANK OWENS WALKER
Defendant: CITY OF PHILADELPHIA , DAT NGUYEN , HBARR and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv01902
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983

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.


Why Is My Information Online?