Cases 21 - 30 of 270
P.C. Richard & Son Long Island Corporation et al v. AU Optronics Corporation et al
as 3:2011cv04119
Plaintiff:
ABC Appliance, Inc., P.C. Richard & Son Long Island Corporation and Marta Cooperative of America, Inc.
Special Master:
Martin Quinn
Defendant:
NEC Corporation of America, Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation, CMO Japan CO., LTD and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Neco Alliance LLC v. AU Optronics Corporation et al
as 3:2012cv01426
Defendant:
NEC Corporation of America, Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation, CMO Japan CO., LTD and others
Plaintiff:
Neco Alliance LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Schultze Agency Services, LLC v. AU Optronics Corporation et al
as 3:2011cv03856
Special Master:
Martin Quinn
Defendant:
NEC Corporation of America, Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation, CMO Japan CO., LTD and others
Plaintiff:
Schultze Agency Services, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Electrograph Systems, Inc. et al v. Epson Imaging Devices Corporation et al
as 3:2010cv00117
Not Classified By Court:
Viewsonic Corporation and Nassau Suffolk Lumber & Supply
Special Master:
Martin Quinn
Defendant:
Chi Mei Optoelectronics Corporation, CMO Japan CO., LTD, Toshiba Matsushita Display Technology, LTD. and others
Plaintiff:
Douglas C. Giordan, Electrograph Technologies, Corp. and Electrograph Systems, Inc.
Claimant:
State Board of Equalization of the State of California
Intervenor:
NEC LCD Technologies, Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Best Buy Co., Inc., et al v. Hannstar Display Corporation
as 14-16184
:
In re: TFT-LCD, (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
Plaintiff - Appellee:
BEST BUY CO., INC., BEST BUY PURCHASING, LLC, BEST BUY ENTERPRISE SERVICE, INC. and others
Defendant - Appellant:
HANNSTAR DISPLAY CORPORATION
In re: Ira Erwin, et al v. LG Display Co., Ltd., et al
as 12-16780
Defendant / Appellee:
EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION, NEC DISPLAY SOLUTIONS OF AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG SDI AMERICA, INC. and others
Not Classified By Court:
In re: TFT-LCD, (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
Appellant:
IRA CONNER ERWIN
Plaintiff / Appellee:
INDIRECT PLAINTIFF CLASS
Indirect Plaintiff Class, et al v. LG Display Co., Ltd., et al
as 13-15930
Defendant / Appellee:
EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION, NEC DISPLAY SOLUTIONS OF AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG SDI AMERICA, INC. and others
Appellant:
MARIA MARSHALL, GERI MAXWELL, WAYNE MARSHALL and others
Not Classified By Court:
In re: TFT-LCD, (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
Amicus Curiae:
STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF WISCONSIN, SPECTRUM SETTLEMENT RECOVERY and others
Plaintiff / Appellee:
INDIRECT PLAINTIFF CLASS
Keena Dale, et al v. LG Display Co., Ltd., et al
as 13-16216
Defendant / Appellee:
EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION, NEC DISPLAY SOLUTIONS OF AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG SDI AMERICA, INC. and others
Not Classified By Court:
In re: TFT-LCD, (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
Amicus Curiae:
STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF WISCONSIN, SPECTRUM SETTLEMENT RECOVERY and others
Appellant:
KEENA DALE
Plaintiff / Appellee:
INDIRECT PLAINTIFF CLASS
Indirect Plaintiff Class, et al v. LG Display Co., Ltd., et al
as 13-15920
Defendant / Appellee:
EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION, NEC DISPLAY SOLUTIONS OF AMERICA, INC., SAMSUNG SDI AMERICA, INC. and others
Not Classified By Court:
In re: TFT-LCD, (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
Amicus Curiae:
STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF WISCONSIN, SPECTRUM SETTLEMENT RECOVERY and others
Plaintiff / Appellee:
INDIRECT PLAINTIFF CLASS
Appellant:
CBC, INC.
Indirect Plaintiff Class, et al v. LG Display Co., Ltd., et al
as 13-15916
Defendant / Appellee:
EPSON IMAGING DEVICES CORPORATION, NEC CORPORATION OF AMERICA, NEC DISPLAY SOLUTIONS OF AMERICA, INC. and others
Not Classified By Court:
In re: TFT-LCD, (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
Amicus Curiae:
STATE OF FLORIDA, STATE OF WISCONSIN, SPECTRUM SETTLEMENT RECOVERY and others
Appellant:
ALEX MARTINEZ
Plaintiff / Appellee:
INDIRECT PLAINTIFF CLASS
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.
