Cases 11 - 20 of 37
Smith v. Colvin
as 4:2015cv00984
Plaintiff:
Randall E. Smith
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Smith et al v. Plymouth Industries, Inc. et al
as 5:2015cv06046
Plaintiff:
Brent E Smith and AES Raptor, LLC
Defendant:
Plymouth Industries, Inc. , Garlock Safety Systems, Inc. , Garlock Chicago, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Smith v. Depriest et al
as 4:2014cv02106
Plaintiff:
David E. Smith
Defendant:
Thomas Depriest, Megan Higgins Julian, David B. Borgmeyer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith v. Howard
as 5:2014cv06064
Plaintiff:
Harvey E Smith, Jr
Defendant:
Edmon Howard, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Smith et al v. Kramer & Frank, P.C.
as 4:2013cv01980
Plaintiff:
James E. Smith and Felicia A. Smith
Defendant:
Kramer & Frank, P.C.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Smith et al v. Garlock Equipment Company
as 5:2013cv00104
Plaintiff:
Brent E Smith and AES Raptor, LLC
Defendant:
Garlock Equipment Company
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 0101 Patents
Smith et al v. Guardian Fall Protection, Inc. et al
as 4:2013cv00105
Plaintiff:
Brent E. Smith and AES Raptor, LLC
Defendant:
Guardian Fall Protection, Inc. and Guardian Fall Protection Rentals, LLC
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 0101 Patents
Smith et al v. Cleasby Manufacturing Co., Inc.
as 4:2013cv00103
Plaintiff:
Brent E Smith and AES Raptor, LLC
Defendant:
Cleasby Manufacturing Co., Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 0101 Patents
Smith et al v. Garlock Equipment Company
as 4:2013cv00104
Plaintiff:
Brent E Smith and AES Raptor, LLC
Defendant:
Garlock Equipment Company
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 0101 Patents
Smith et al v. Panther Products Corporation et al
as 4:2013cv00106
Plaintiff:
Brent E. Smith and AES Raptor, LLC
Defendant:
Panther Products Corporation and Great Northern Building Products, LLC
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 0101 Patents
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.
