Cases 11 - 20 of 31
Doe v. Avid Life Media, Inc. et al
as 4:2015cv01926
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Defendant:
Avid Life Media, Inc. and Avid Dating Life, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
J. Doe 1 et al v. Avid Life Media, Inc., et al
as 4:2015cv01879
Defendant:
Avid Life Media, Inc. and Avid Dating Life, Inc.
Plaintiff:
J. Doe 1 , J. Doe 2 , J. Doe 3 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Doe v. Avid Life Media Inc
as 4:2015cv01876
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Defendant:
Avid Life Media, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Doe v. Avid Life Media Inc et al
as 4:2015cv01877
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Defendant:
Avid Life Media, Inc. and Avid Dating Life, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
John Doe v. Avid Life Media, Inc., et al
as 4:2015cv01878
Defendant:
Avid Life Media, Inc. and Avid Dating Life, Inc.
Plaintiff:
John Doe #1 , John Doe #2 , John Doe #3 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
IN RE: ASHLEY MADISON CUSTOMER DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION
as 4:2015md02669
Plaintiff:
John Does 1-21, David Miller, Nhung Truong and others
Defendant:
Avid Dating Life, Inc., Noel Biderman, Barnes & Thornburg LLP and others
Petitioner:
Amicus Doe 1, Amicus Doe 3, Amicus Doe 2 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
Lee E. Campbell v. Avid Life Media Inc et al
as 2:2015cv09475
Defendant:
Avid Dating Life Inc., and Avid Life Media Inc
Plaintiff:
Lee E. Campbell
Gustavo Alfaro v. Avid Life Media, Inc. et al
as 5:2015cv02295
Plaintiff:
Gustavo Alfaro
Defendant:
Avid Dating Life, Inc., Avid Life Media, Inc. and Noel Biderman
Doe v. Avid Life Media et al
as 1:2015cv08270
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Defendant:
Avid Life Media, Inc. and Avid Dating Life, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Doe v. Avid Life Media, Inc. et al
as 3:2015cv00658
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Defendant:
Avid Life Media, Inc. and Avid Dating Life, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
