Cases 51 - 60 of 66
Acosta v. Cambridge Technologies Group, Inc. et al
as 1:2017cv01238
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Cambridge Technologies Group, Inc., Andrew Carrington and Cambridge Technologies Group, Inc. 401(K) Plan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1002
Acosta v. Tate et al
as 2:2017cv04183
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Donald Tate, Fas Chek Supermarkets and Fas Chek Employee Medical Benefit Plan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001
Midland Resource Recovery, Inc. v. Acosta et al
as 2:2017cv00123
Plaintiff:
Midland Resource Recovery, Inc.
Defendant:
R. Alexander Acosta , Loren Sweatt and United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety And Health Administration
Intervenor:
Specialized Professional Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Acosta v. Rudraraju et al
as 1:2017cv01094
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Shah Rudraraju and Softalia, Inc. 401k Plan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1132
Acosta v. Romero Landscaping, Inc. et al
as 8:2017cv02587
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Romero Landscaping, Inc. and Jose Romero
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Acosta v. Tile Restoration, Incorporated
as 4:2017cv00122
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Tile Restoration, Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Acosta v. Aimet Technologies, LLC
as 5:2017cv00442
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Aimet Technologies, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2
Acosta v. Parham, et al
as 3:2017cv00596
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Stephen Hart Parham and Dominion Paving & Sealing Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001
Alexander Acosta v. Local 689, ATU
as 17-1966
Plaintiff - Appellee:
THOMAS E. PEREZ, Secretary of Labor and R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA, Secretary of Labor
Defendant - Appellant:
LOCAL 689, AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION
Acosta v. Woo Lae Oak Food Group, LLC et al
as 1:2017cv00785
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Woo Lae Oak Food Group, LLC, Hang Nam Paik and Kyung Hee Paik
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
