Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Merl Code v. adidas America, Incorporated
as 24-1143
Plaintiff:
MERL CODE
Defendant:
ADIDAS AMERICA, INCORPORATED
Code v. Adidas America Inc
as 6:2023cv04997
Plaintiff:
Merl Code
Defendant:
Adidas America Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract
Brian Bowen, II v. Adidas America Inc.
as 21-2029
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRIAN BOWEN, II
Defendant / Appellee:
ADIDAS AMERICA, INCORPORATED, JAMES GATTO, MERL CODE and others
Brian Bowen v. Adidas America Inc
as 21-1764
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRIAN BOWEN, II
Defendant / Appellee:
ADIDAS AMERICA, INCORPORATED, JAMES GATTO, MERL CODE and others
United States of America v. Evans (Code)
as 19-3643
Not Yet Classified:
United States of America
Defendant:
Emanuel Richardson, AKA Book, Christian Dawkins, Anthony Bland, AKA Tony and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Merl Code
United States of America v. Evans (Dawkins)
as 19-3623
Not Yet Classified:
United States of America
Defendant:
Emanuel Richardson, AKA Book, Anthony Bland, AKA Tony and Lamont Evans
Defendant / Appellant:
Merl Code and Christian Dawkins
United States of America v. Gatto
as 19-783
Defendant / Appellant:
James Gatto, AKA Jim, Christian Dawkins and Merl Code
Not Yet Classified:
United States of America
United States of America v. Gatto (Dawkins)
as 19-788
Defendant / Appellant:
Christian Dawkins
Not Yet Classified:
United States of America
Defendant:
James Gatto, AKA Jim and Merl Code
United States of America v. Gatto (Code)
as 19-786
Defendant:
Christian Dawkins and James Gatto, AKA Jim
Defendant / Appellant:
Merl Code
Not Yet Classified:
United States of America
Bowen v. Adidas America Inc et al
as 3:2018cv03118
Defendant:
Thomas Gassnola, James Gatto, Adidas America Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Brian Bowen, II
Interested Party:
Dan Cutler
Cross Defendant:
Brian Bowen, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
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.
