Cases 11 - 20 of 28
In Re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation
as 3:2007md01827
Defendant:
Toshiba Mobile Display Company, Ltd., Sony Corporation, Samsung Semiconductor, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Tammy Long, Judd Eliasoph, Robert Harmon and others
Intervenor:
Leah Nylen, Chris Donnelly, State of Mississippi and others
Special Master:
Martin Quinn, Mr. Daniel Weinstein and Fern M Smith
Not Classified By Court:
Julius N. Dunmore, Jr., Stefan Rest, Dale Keena and others
Counter Defendant:
Rockwell Automation Inc., Sony Computer Entertainment America, LLC, Acer America Corporation and others
Interested Party:
Douglas C. Giordan, Joseph M. Alioto, Alexandra Brudy and others
Counter Claimant:
LG Display Co., Ltd. and LG Display America, Inc.
Amicus Curiae:
State of South Carolina and State of California
Claimant:
Tiffany and Company, CA Technologies, Inc., American University and others
Trustee:
Charles W Daff
Petitioner:
Fanshawe College of Applied Arts and Technology
3Rd Party Defendant:
Ricoh Electronics, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
State of California et al v. Teikoku Seiyaku Co., Ltd. et al
as 3:2018cv00675
Plaintiff:
State of California , State of Alabama , State of Arkansas and others
Defendant:
Teikoku Seiyaku Co., Ltd. and Teikoku Pharma USA, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Isbell v. State of Oklahoma, Department of Human Services et al
as 1:2018cv00269
Plaintiff:
Sarah Isbell
Defendant:
State of Oklahoma, Department of Human Services, State of California, Department of Child Support Services, Jim Hutchinson, Director Of Oklahoma Department of Human Services and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
United States of America et al v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv05389
Defendant:
Astellas Pharma, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Impax Laboratories, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
District of Columbia, John Radice, State of California and others
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
Francis Grandinetti v. State of Texas and agents et al
as 2:2015cv06174
Respondent:
All initiating parties or agents or contractors, David A. Burrows, Governor George W. Bush and others
Petitioner:
Francis Grandinetti
United States of America et al v. DJO Global Inc. et al
as 2:2012cv07152
Defendant:
Biomet, Inc., DJO Finance LLC, DJO Global Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
District of Columbia, Russ Milko, Doris Modglin and others
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
State of Missouri, et al v. Harris
as 2:2014cv00341
Defendant:
Kamala D. Harris and Karen Ross
Plaintiff:
State of Missouri , State of Nebraska , State of Alabama and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
The State of California et al v. Mitsubishi Electric Corporation et al
as 3:2012cv05229
Plaintiff:
The State of California , The State of Arizona , The State of Arkansas and others
Defendant:
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
The State of California by its Attorney General Kamala D. Harris and the City and County of San Francisco Ex Rel Dennis J. Herrera, The County of Santa Clara, and Los Angeles Unified School District o et al v. Toshiba Corporation et al
as 3:2012cv05230
Plaintiff:
The State of California by its Attorney General Kamala D. Harris and the City and County of San Francisco Ex Rel Dennis J. Herrera, The County of Santa Clara, and Los Angeles Unified School District o , The State of Arizona by its Attorney GeneralTom Horne , The State of Arkansas by its Attorney General Dustin McDaniel and others
Defendant:
Toshiba Corporation and Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
The State of California et al v. Hitachi, Ltd. et al
as 3:2012cv05231
Plaintiff:
The State of California , The State of Arizona , The State of Arkansas and others
Defendant:
Hitachi, Ltd. and Hitachi America, Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
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.
