Cases 1 - 10 of 166,853
Shenzhen Wan Rong Technology Co. LTD et al. v. ADR Products, LLC
as 1:2024cv00894
Plaintiff:
Shenzhen Wan Rong Technology Co. LTD and Shenzhen Long Chi Auto Services Co., Ltd.
Defendant:
ADR Products, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1126 Patent Infringement
Wheeler v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02656
Plaintiff:
Kelly Wheeler
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Christenberry et al v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02657
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Christenberry and Charles Christenberry
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Lewis v. Davol Inc et al
as 2:2024cv02658
Plaintiff:
David Lewis
Defendant:
Davol Inc and CR Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Hairston v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02659
Plaintiff:
Phyllis Hairston
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Maysonet v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02661
Plaintiff:
Jose Maysonet
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Northrup v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02665
Plaintiff:
Deanna Northrup
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Pandich v. Davol Inc et al
as 2:2024cv02662
Plaintiff:
Jerilyn Pandich
Defendant:
Davol Inc and CR Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Peters v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02669
Plaintiff:
Merle Peters
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Mcneely v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02663
Plaintiff:
Cary Mcneely
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
