Cases 1 - 10 of 19
Damon Tate v. 800-Flowers, Inc.
as 2:2023cv04340
Plaintiff:
Damon Tate, Alba Vargas, Natasha Paracha and others
Defendant:
800-Flowers, Inc. and 800-Flowers, Inc. doing business as 1-800- Flowers.com doing business as Harry and David doing business as Personalization Mall doing business as Sharis Berries doing business as 1-800-Baskets.com doing business as Simply Chocolate doing business as
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Fraud
Petculescu v. Harry and David LLC
as 2:2021cv01596
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth M Petculescu
Defendant:
Harry and David LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv00363
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Mann v. Harry and David, LLC
as 1:2015cv02178
Defendant:
Harry and David, LLC
Plaintiff:
Patricia Mann
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
Gage et al v. Harry and David, LLC
as 1:2015cv00373
Plaintiff:
Sandy F Ash, Sheryl A Baird, Amey L Gage and others
Defendant:
Harry and David, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2 (a) Fair Labor Standards Act
Select Retrieval, LLC v. Altrec, Inc. et al
as 3:2011cv01104
Defendant:
Altrec, Inc., Amazon.com, Inc., Bag Barrow or Steal, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Select Retrieval, LLC
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271 Patent Infringement
Harry and David v. Anshu Pathak
as 11-56504
Plaintiff - Appellee:
HARRY AND DAVID, an Oregon Corporation
Defendant - Appellant:
ANSHU B. PATHAK, an individual, DBA Brentwood Trading Group, DBA Organic Fruit of the Month Club, DBA Premium Enterprises
Harry and David v. Anshu Pathak
as 11-35716
Plaintiff - Appellee:
HARRY AND DAVID, an Oregon corporation
Defendant - Appellant:
ANSHU PATHAK
Anshu B Pathak v. ICG America Inc et al
as 5:2011cv00055
Defendant:
24 Seven Enterprises NV Inc, C & H Clubs USA Inc, Does and others
Plaintiff:
Anshu B Pathak
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.
