Cases 31 - 40 of 45
Lopez v. Nordstrom, Inc.
as 1:2016cv03194
Plaintiff:
Robert G. Lopez
Defendant:
Nordstrom, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1051
Belfer Cosmetics, LLC v. Nordstrom, Inc. et al
as 1:2016cv01738
Plaintiff:
Belfer Cosmetics, LLC
Defendant:
Nordstrom Inc. and Erno Laszlo, Inc.
Counter_claimant:
Erno Laszlo, Inc. and Nordstrom Inc.
Counter_defendant:
Belfer Cosmetics, LLC , Erno Laszlo, Inc. and Nordstrom Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1126
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv01617
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1640
Mara Hoffman, Inc. v. Big Buddha, Inc. et al
as 1:2014cv02196
Plaintiff:
Mara Hoffman, Inc.
Defendant:
Big Buddha, Inc. and Nordstrom, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501
The Fashion Exchange LLC v. Hybrid Promotions, LLC et al
as 1:2014cv01254
Plaintiff:
The Fashion Exchange LLC
Defendant:
Hybrid Promotions, LLC, Jarrod Dogan, Gavin Dogan and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv00500
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Equal Rights Under the Law
PH International Trading Corp. v. Nordstrom, Inc.
as 13-1287
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PH International Trading Corp.
Defendant - Appellee:
Nordstrom, Inc.
Beale v. Alexis Bittar, Inc. et al
as 1:2012cv07902
Plaintiff:
Eva Marie Beale
Defendant:
Alexis Bittar, Inc., A Jewelry Wonderland, Alene Too, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Dillard's, Inc. et al
as 3:2011cv00929
Plaintiff:
Romag Fasteners, Inc.
Defendant:
Dillard's, Inc. , Nordstrom, Inc. , The Bon-Ton Stores, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
The Associated Press v. Nordstrom, Inc.
as 1:2011cv01643
Plaintiff:
The Associated Press
Defendant:
Nordstrom, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
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.
