Cases 1 - 10 of 24
Double Diamond Distribution, Ltd. v. Crocs, Inc.
as 1:2023cv01790
Plaintiff:
Double Diamond Distribution, Ltd.
Defendant:
Crocs, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Unfair Competition (Lanham Act)
Quinonez v. IMI Material Handling Logistics Inc. et al
as 3:2021cv00159
Plaintiff:
Plinio Alvarado Quinonez
Defendant:
John Doe 7, Justin Parsons, Laporte Consultants Corp. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
J.N. et al v. Macy s Corporate Services, Inc. et al
as 8:2018cv01222
Plaintiff:
J. N. and Diep Nguyen
Defendant:
Macy s Corporate Services, Inc., Does 1-100, Crocs, Inc. and others
Interested Party:
Blackstone Group LP (NYSE: BX)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
J.N. et al v. Macy s Corporate Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2018cv06009
Plaintiff:
Diep Nguyen, Jerry Nguyen and J. N.
Defendant:
Macy's West Stores, Inc., Crocs, Inc., Macy's Corporate Services, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Kim v. Crocs, Inc.
as 1:2016cv00460
Plaintiff:
Flora Kim and David Kang
Defendant:
Crocs, Inc. , Hilton Hawaiian Village LLC , Does Entities 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Nguyen v. Bloomingdale's, Inc. et al
as 1:2015cv00277
Plaintiff:
Ivan Nguyen
Defendant:
Bloomingdale's, Inc. , Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corporation and Crocs, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Geshke v. Crocs, Inc., et al
as 12-2204
Plaintiff - Appellant:
NANCY GESHKE, Mother and Natural Guardian of N.K. a minor and individually
Defendant - Appellee:
CROCS, INC.
Defendant:
MA BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, a/k/a MBTA and KONE, INC.
Varquez v. Crocs, Inc.
as 1:2012cv06924
Plaintiff:
David Varquez
Defendant:
Crocs, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Allon Motzney et al v. Crocs Inc et al
as 8:2012cv00220
Defendant:
Crocs Inc and Does
Plaintiff:
F. M., Allon Motzney and Josephine Motzney
Allon Motzney et al v. Crocs Inc et al
as 8:2012cv00119
Defendant:
Crocs Inc and Does
Plaintiff:
F. M., Allon Motzney, Allon Motzney 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.
