Cases 1 - 10 of 90
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00031
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Wangs Alliance Corporation v. Minka Lighting, LLC
as 1:2024cv00819
Plaintiff:
Wangs Alliance Corporation d/b/a WAC Lighting
Defendant:
Minka Lighting, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1126 Patent Infringement
Wang v. CCRM Fertility of Northern Virginia
as 1:2024cv00539
Plaintiff:
Zhongan Wang
Defendant:
CCRM Fertility of Northern Virginia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Hasan v. Shu Chung Wang
as 7:2024cv00068
Plaintiff:
Mohammad N. Hasan
Defendant:
Dr. Lawrence Shu Chung Wang
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilborn v. Wang et al
as 7:2024cv00006
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Dean Wilborn
Defendant:
Dr. Lawrence Shu Chang Wang, Dr. Ohia and Dr. Mark Amonette
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wilborn v. Wang et al
as 2:2023cv00677
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Dean Wilborn
Defendant:
Dr. Lawrence Shu Chang Wang, Dr. Ohia and Dr. Mark Amonette
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Campbell v. Western Express, Inc. et al
as 5:2023cv00030
Plaintiff:
Dewayne K. Campbell
Defendant:
Western Express, Inc. and Jun Wang
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Anderson v. Wang
as 7:2022cv00655
Plaintiff:
William L. Anderson
Defendant:
Dr. Wang
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Anderson v. Wang et al
as 7:2022cv00612
Plaintiff:
William Lee Anderson, II
Defendant:
Dr. Laurance Shu Chang Wang and Dr. Mark Amonette
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Macher et al v. Netflix, Inc et al
as 7:2022cv00575
Plaintiff:
Roland Macher and Slumlord Millionaire LLC
Defendant:
Netflix, Inc, Reed Hastings, Marc Randolph and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338 Copyright 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.
