Cases 131 - 140 of 483
Tarasevich v. Novak et al
as 2:2017cv12697
Defendant:
Denis Novak , Andrey Kustarnikov and Accon, LLC
Plaintiff:
Alexander Tarasevich
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
Saito et al v. Vasos et al
as 3:2017cv01138
Plaintiff:
Glenn Saito , Barry Lai , Myron Nakata and others
Defendant:
Todd Vasos , Michael M. Calbert , Warren F. Bryant and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Schwartz v. Sparton Corporation et al
as 1:2017cv01663
Plaintiff:
David Schwartz
Defendant:
Sparton Corporation , Joseph J. Hartnett , Alan L. Bazaar and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Onesti v. Thompson et al
as 5:2017cv00305
Plaintiff:
Paul Onesti
Defendant:
Scott L. Thompson , Barry A. Hytinen , Evelyn S. Dilsaver and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
The Mandatory Poster Agency, Inc. v. Fata et al
as 1:2017cv00606
Plaintiff:
The Mandatory Poster Agency, Inc.
Defendant:
Steven Fata and Joseph Sheets
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1836
Lai v. Covisint Corp. et al
as 2:2017cv12183
Defendant:
Andreas Mai, Lawrence David Hansen, Jonathan Yaron and others
Plaintiff:
Valiant K Lai
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Berg v. Covisint Corp. et al
as 2:2017cv12000
Defendant:
Covisint Corp., John F. Smith, Bernard M. Goldsmith and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Berg
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Gallagher v. Advancepierre Foods Holdings, Inc. et al
as 1:2017cv00356
Plaintiff:
Brian Gallagher
Defendant:
Advancepierre Foods Holdings, Inc., Dean Hollis, Christopher D Sliva and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Parshall v. Advancepierre Foods Holdings, Inc. et al
as 1:2017cv00333
Plaintiff:
Paul Parshall
Defendant:
Advancepierre Foods Holdings, Inc., Dean Hollis, Celeste A Clark and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
v. Bushansky et al
as 1:2017cv00325
Defendant:
Stephen Bushansky, Advancepierre Foods, Inc., John N Simons, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
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.
