Cases 21 - 30 of 39
Beam v. Colvin
as 5:2016cv00147
Plaintiff:
David Beam
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Beam v. Colvin
as 7:2016cv00568
Plaintiff:
David Beam
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Johnson v. Beam Suntory, Inc.
as 1:2015cv01355
Plaintiff:
Eric Johnson
Defendant:
Beam Suntory, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501
Beam v. Colvin
as 1:2014cv09889
Plaintiff:
Crystal Carol Beam
Defendant:
Carolyn Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Beam v. Colvin
as 1:2013cv00733
Plaintiff:
Jennifer M. Beam
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
Sidney Frank Importing Co., Inc. v. Beam Inc. et al
as 7:2013cv01391
Plaintiff:
Sidney Frank Importing Co., Inc.
Defendant:
Beam Inc. and Cooley Distillery PLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Rapcinsky et al v. Skinnygirl Cocktails, L.L.C. et al
as 1:2011cv06546
Plaintiff:
Christopher Rapcinsky and Erin Baker
Defendant:
Skinnygirl Cocktails, L.L.C., SGC Global, L.L.C. and Beam Global Spirits & Wine, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Artis et al v. Amphenol Corporation
as 3:2011cv00876
Plaintiff:
Crystal Artis , Helen Ballard , Raymond Ballard and others
Defendant:
Amphenol Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jim Beam Brands CO. v. Tequila Cuervo La Rojena S.A. de C.V.
as 1:2010cv01710
Plaintiff:
Jim Beam Brands CO. and Jim Beam Brands CO.
Defendant:
Tequila Cuervo La Rojena S.A. de C.V., Tequila Cuervo La Rojena S.A. de C.V. and Tequila Cuervo La Rojena S.A. de C.V.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338 Patent Infringement
Tequila Cuervo La Rojena S.A. de C.V. v. Jim Beam Brands Co.
as 1:2010cv00203
Plaintiff:
Tequila Cuervo La Rojena S.A. de C.V., Tequila Cuervo La Rojena S.A. de C.V. and Tequila Cuervo La Rojena S.A. de C.V.
Defendant:
Jim Beam Brands Co.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114 Trademark Infringement
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.
