Cases 1 - 10 of 10
INZA et al v. AT&T INC. et al
as 1:2024cv03054
Defendant:
SRIKANT M. DATAR, LUIS A. UBINAS, SRINIVASAN GOPALAN and others
Plaintiff:
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC, RICHARD INZA and MICHAEL INZA
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC v. AT&T INC. et al
as 1:2024cv03051
Defendant:
AT&T SERVICES, INC., ANDRE ALMEIDA, TIMOTHEUS HOTTGES and others
Plaintiff:
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
LEON et al v. AT&T INC. et al
as 1:2024cv02397
Plaintiff:
RICHARD INZA, MICHAEL INZA and RAY LEON
Defendant:
WILLIAM E. KENNARD, JOHN STANKEY, SRINIVASAN GOPALAN and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC v. AT&T INC. et al
as 1:2024cv02395
Defendant:
AT&T SERVICES, INC., RAPHAEL KUBLER, AT&T CORPORATION and others
Plaintiff:
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
Nguyen v. McMillon et al
as 1:2021cv00551
Plaintiff:
Thuy Nguyen
Defendant:
M. Brett Biggs, Cesar Conde, Marissa A. Mayer and others
Nominal Defendant:
Walmart, Inc.
Abt v. Alvarez et al
as 1:2021cv00172
Defendant:
Cesar Conde, Michael T. Duke, James W. Breyer and others
Nominal Defendant:
Walmart, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Manuel Abt
Talukder v. Yahoo! Inc. et al
as 3:2017cv01525
Plaintiff:
Nafiz Talukder
Defendant:
Yahoo! Inc., Marissa A. Mayer and Kenneth A. Goldman
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Bowser v. Mayer et al
as 5:2017cv00810
Plaintiff:
Jay Bowser
Defendant:
Marissa A. Mayer, David Filo, Kenneth A. Goldman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Summer v. Mayer et al
as 5:2017cv00787
Plaintiff:
David Summer
Defendant:
Marissa A. Mayer, David Filo, Kenneth A. Goldman and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Mark Madrack v. Yahoo! Inc. et al
as 5:2017cv00373
Defendant:
Yahoo! Inc., Marissa A. Mayer and Kenneth A. Goldman
Plaintiff:
Mark Madrack
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
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.
