Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Reeves et al v. 3M Company et al
as 2:2023cv03303
Defendant:
3M Company, Du Pont De Nemours Inc, UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Donald Scott Reeves, Delbert Eugene Powell, Roderick Charles Prast and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal-Personal Injury
Thomas Scholz v. 3M Company, The et al
as 2:2023cv02043
Defendant:
3M Company, The, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, Chemguard Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Thomas Scholz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Lacy Williams, Jr. v. Barack Obama
as 16-6061
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LACY LEE WILLIAMS, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, President, Administration, Individual and Official Capacity, ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. Attorney General, Individual and Official Capacity, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Disability Rights Section - NYA, Civil Rights Division/Litigation Section , PHB and others
Williams v. Obama, et al
as 5:2015ct03181
Plaintiff:
Lacy Lee Williams, Jr.
Defendant:
Barack Hussein Obama, Eric H. Holder, Jr., US Department of Justice and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Scholz v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv07235
Plaintiff:
Paula M. Scholz
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Scholz Design, Inc. v. Mohamed et al
as 1:2009cv00282
Plaintiff:
Scholz Design, Inc.
Defendant:
Zubair Mohamed, Ammal Mohamed and Bull Run CADD, LLC
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Scholz Design, Inc. v. Zimmerman et al
as 8:2008cv01759
Plaintiff:
Scholz Design, Inc.
Defendant:
Taryn Zimmerman, Studio Z Design Concepts, LLC and Sandy Spring Builders, LLC
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Scholz Design, Inc. v. Stingel, et al
as 1:2007cv00296
Plaintiff:
Scholz Design, Inc.
Defendant:
John Stingel and Caroline Stingel
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 145 Patent Infringement
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.
