Cases
Grumpy Cat Limited v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto
as 1:2022cv04777
Plaintiff: Grumpy Cat Limited
Defendant: The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto, baiyuxi1493, bazawp and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 44 Trademark Infringement
Ryan v. Boston Scientific Corporation
as 2:2016cv02461
Plaintiff: Peggy Ryan
Defendant: Boston Scientific Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
United States and States of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, Ne et al v. Hind Health Care, Inc. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 5:2015cv04928
Plaintiff: United States and States of California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, Ne, W. Christian Hoyer and Peggy Ryan
Defendant: Hind Health Care, Inc., Teikoku Seiyaku Co., Ltd., Larry Caldwell and others
Movant: United States of America
Miscellaneou: State of California
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729
Gursheel Dhillon, et al v. Endo Pharmaceuticals, et al
as 15-2792
Plaintiff - Appellant: GURSHEEL S. DHILLON, on behalf of the United States of America and all Health Related Plans that purchased Lidoderm and cash payers
Plaintiff - Appellee: MAX H. WEATHERSBY, JR., ex rel. On behalf of the states of CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IN, LA, MD, MI, MN, MT, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OK, RI, TN, TX, VA, WI, and the DC. and MK LITIGATION PARTNERSHIP 2011 LLP, ex rel. On behalf of the states of CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IN, LA, MD, MI, MN, MT, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OK, RI, TN, TX, VA, WI, and the DC.
Intervenor-Plaintiff - Appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellee: ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS, PEGGY RYAN, ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS INC and others
Gursheel Dhillon, et al v. Endo Pharmaceuticals, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 14-3377
Plaintiff - Appellant: GURSHEEL S. DHILLON, On behalf of the United States of America and all Health Related Plans that purchased Lidoderm and cash payers
Plaintiff - Appellee: MAX H. WEATHERSBY, JR., ex rel., On behalf of the States of CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IN, LA, MD, MI, MN, MT, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OK, RI, TN, TX, VA, WI and the D.C., MK LITIGATION PARTNERSHIP 2011 LLP, ex. rel. On behalf of the states of CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IN, LA, MD, MI, MN, MT, NV, NJ, NM, NY, NC, OK, RI, TN, TX, VA, WI, and the D.C. and PEGGY RYAN, United States of America ex rel. Peggy Ryan, States of: FL, NY, MA, CA, VA, DE, IL, NV, GA, HI, IN, MT, NH, NJ, NM, OK, RI, TEN, TX
Intervenor-Plaintiff - Appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellee: ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS, ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS INC, ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS HOLDINGS INC and others
Ryan v. Colvin
as 6:2013cv03275
Defendant: Carolyn W. Colvin
Plaintiff: Peggy Ryan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv02202
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
Simmons et al v. Enterprise Holdings, Inc. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 4:2010cv00625
Plaintiff: Kandice Simmons, Tamika Kilgore, Meia Burks and others
Defendant: Enterprise Holdings, Inc. and EAN Services, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
USA ex. rel. RYAN v. ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS INC. We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2005cv03450
Plaintiff: PEGGY RYAN
Defendant: ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
Intervenor_plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729

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.


Why Is My Information Online?