Cases 1 - 10 of 17
Annamalai v. Sproul et al
as 3:2022cv01541
Plaintiff:
Annamalai Annamalai and Swamiji Sri Selvam Siddhar
Defendant:
Daniel Sproul, Nathan Simpkins, Gary Burgess and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
DELOCH v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES et al
as 2:2021cv11400
Defendant:
ABBOTT LABORATORIES, TAKEDA DEVELOPMENT CENTER AMERICAS, INC. F/K/A TAKEDA GLOBAL RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC., ASTRAZENECA LP and others
Plaintiff:
MARGO DELOCH
In Re:
PROTON-PUMP INHIBITOR PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (No. II)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Deloche v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al.
as 9:2021cv80441
Defendant:
Chattem, Inc., McKesson Corporation, GlaxoSmithKline LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Cathy Deloche
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
DELOCH v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC et al
as 3:2021cv03588
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC
Plaintiff:
VICKIE DELOCH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Deloch v. Commissioner of Social Security Administration
as 5:2018cv00578
Plaintiff:
Dontrell Deloch
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Sidney Deloch v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden
as 16-30466
Petitioner - Appellant:
SIDNEY DELOCH
Respondent - Appellee:
DARREL VANNOY, WARDEN, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY
Deloch v. Cain, et al
as 3:1998cv00838
Respondent:
Burl Cain and Richard Ieyoub
Petitioner:
Sidney Deloch
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Walker v. Tool et al
as 6:2015cv00027
Plaintiff:
Elgin Walker
Defendant:
Tool, John Paul and Deloch
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
PORTER v. USA
as 1:2011cv00616
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
ROSA DELOCH PORTER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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.
