Cases filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Cases 21 - 30 of 46
AT&T Mobility LLC v. Leslie Bernardi, et al
as 11-17856
Plaintiff - Appellee: AT&T MOBILITY LLC
Defendant - Appellant: LESLIE BERNARDI and LAURA BARRETT
Ashley Adams, et al v. AT&T Mobility, LLC We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 11-35871
Plaintiff: ASHLEY ADAMS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Plaintiff - Appellant: ALEXANDRA SERVERANCE
Defendant - Appellee: AT&T MOBILITY, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
AT&T Mobility LLC, et al v. AU Optronics Corporation, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 11-16188
Plaintiff - Appellant: AT&T MOBILITY LLC, AT&T CORP., AT&T SERVICES, INC. and others
Defendant - Appellee: AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION AMERICA, INC, CHI MEI CORPORATION and others
Luvdarts LLC, et al v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 11-55497
Plaintiff - Appellant: LUVDARTS LLC, a California limited liability company and DAVIS-REUSS, INC., a California Corporation, DBA DigiPie
Defendant: VERIZON WIRELESS TELECOM, INC., a Delaware Corporation and AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES INC., a Delaware corporation
Defendant - Appellee: AT&T MOBILITY, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, a New Jersey corporation, DBA Verizon Wireless, SPRINT SPECTRUM LP, a Delawre Limited Parthership and others
Heather Stern, et al v. Karin Lynch
as 10-57062
Plaintiff - Appellee: HEATHER STERN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
Objector - Appellant: KARIN LYNCH
Objector: MARC GAMBELLO and GENE HOPKINS
Defendant - Appellee: NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation, FKA AT&T Wireless Services, Inc., AT&T MOBILITY CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, FKA Cingular Wireless Corporation and AT&T MOBILITY LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, FKA Cingular Wireless LLC
Heather Stern, et al v. Marc Gambello, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 10-56929
Plaintiff - Appellee: HEATHER STERN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, BROOKE RANDOLPH, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, JOHN GIRARD, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated and others
Objector - Appellant: MARC GAMBELLO and GENE HOPKINS
Defendant: NEW CINGULAR WIRELESS SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation, FKA AT&T Wireless Services, Inc., AT&T MOBILITY CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, FKA Cingular Wireless Corporation and AT&T MOBILITY LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, FKA Cingular Wireless LLC
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 10-56745
Plaintiff - Appellant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Paul Holman, et al v. Apple, Inc., et al
as 10-80145
Plaintiff - Respondent: PAUL HOLMAN, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, LUCY RIVELLO, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, VINCENT SCOTTI and others
Defendant - Petitioner: APPLE, INC. and AT&T MOBILITY, LLC
AU Optronics Corporation, et al v. USDCSF, et al
as 10-71745
: In re: AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION and AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION AMERICA
Petitioner: AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION and AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION AMERICA
Respondent: USDC, SAN FRANCISCO
Defendant: EPSON ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
Real Party In Interest: CHI MEI INNOLUX, NEXGEN MEDIATECH USA, INC., HANNSTAR DISPLAY CORPORATION and others
Motorola, Inc., et al v. Hannstar Display Corporation, et al
as 10-16215
In Re: In re: TFT-LCD, (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
Plaintiff: MOTOROLA, INC., AT&T MOBILITY, LLC, AT&T CORPORATION and others
Intervenor: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Intervenor - Appellee: STATE OF ILLINOIS and STATE OF WASHINGTON
Defendant - Appellant: HANNSTAR DISPLAY CORPORATION
Defendant: AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION AMERICA, CHI MEI INNOLUX and others

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?