Cases 51 - 60 of 92
USA v. Miguel Beltran-Marquez
as 12-30223
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
MIGUEL BELTRAN-MARQUEZ, DBA Trinidad Romero Atondo, AKA Ignacio Martinez-Chavez, AKA Polo
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv03846
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Marco Arce Garcia v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 12-71268
Petitioner:
MARCO POLO ARCE GARCIA
Respondent:
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General
Hsu v. Benov
as 1:2011cv01683
Petitioner:
Polo Shu Hsu
Respondent:
Michael L. Benov
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
The Indigo Group USA Inc v. Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation
as 2:2011cv05883
Plaintiff:
Indigo Group USA Inc
Defendant:
Polo Ralph Lauren Corporation
Georgia-Pacific Gypsum LLC v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 117, et al
as 3:2011cv05497
Plaintiff:
Georgia-Pacific Gypsum LLC
Defendant:
International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 117 and Arthur Polo
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185
Guards Polo Club Holdings LTD v. Reid et al
as 3:2011cv01817
Plaintiff:
Guards Polo Club Holdings LTD
Defendant:
Margaret Goodman Reid and Michael McGregor
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
-LRL Dish Network, LLC et al v. Polo
as 2:2010cv01374
Plaintiff:
Dish Network, LLC, Echostar Technologies, LLC and Nagrastar, LLC
Defendant:
Darryl Polo
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101 Copyright Infringement
Aspen Square Management, Inc. et al v. Scottsdale Insurance Company
as 2:2011cv00093
Plaintiff:
Aspen Square Management, Inc. and Polo Club Cordova Limited Partnership
Unknown:
E. Breen Arntz and E. Breen Arntz
Defendant:
Scottsdale Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
Martin Richard Pemstein et al v. State of California et al
as 8:2011cv00016
Defendant:
Central District Appeals Court of CA, Jaime C Holmes, Peter Polos and others
Plaintiff:
Martin Richard Pemstein
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.
