Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
|
|
- Curtis Bennett
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LIBRE BY NEXUS, INC. ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No. 1:17-cv ) v. ) ) BUZZFEED, INC., et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ) PLAINTIFF S CONSOLIDATED OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS AND SPECIAL MOTION TO DISMISS COMES NOW the plaintiff, LIBRE BY NEXUS, INC. ( Libre ), by counsel, and in Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss and Special Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants, BUZZFEED, INC. and BEN SMITH (together, BuzzFeed ), states as follows. BACKGROUND Libre assists undocumented aliens who are held in government detention centers by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) pending removal/deportation proceedings to secure release on bond. Complaint, at 8. Libre contracts with bail bond companies, who actually post the immigration bond needed to secure release of the detainee. Id. The bond companies are indemnified against a forfeiture of the bond by Libre. A detainee is not required to pay collateral or otherwise secure the bond since Libre secures it (or collateralizes it) using a GPS monitoring system. Id. Using this business model, Libre has been able to reunite thousands of people who are awaiting final disposition of their immigration status with their families. Id. The Complaint alleges the crucial nature of the relationship between Libre and the bail bond companies. It is critical that Libre maintains a good relationship with the bail bond companies in order for them to accept Libre s monitoring system as security and continue to issue bonds.
2 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 2 of 9 Libre s reputation with the bond companies is seriously jeopardized by false and misleading statements contained in the article published by BuzzFeed on July 23, Complaint, at 9. The sting of the defamation in this case is damage done to Libre s reputation for good business practices with the bond companies, without whom Libre cannot conduct business. A corollary to this is, of course, Libre s reputation with ICE, which administers the detention system and retains jurisdiction over detainees while released on bond. BuzzFeed chose to title its article with an accusation: Immigrants Desperate To Get Out of US Detention Can Get Trapped in Debt. The article is a compendium of false, misleading and defamatory statements about Libre and its business practices, but worst as it relates to damage to Libre s reputation with the critical bond companies, is the false statement that Libre was investigated by ICE s Homeland Security Investigations ( HSI ) for targeting undocumented immigrants in custody and fraudulently charging them a fee for services. Complaint, at 9. BuzzFeed was fully aware at the time its statements regarding an HSI investigation were published of a letter from ICE to Representative Norma Torres (U.S. Congress), dated November 15, 2015, which fully addressed and disposed of any question regarding an investigation. Complaint, at 10. The ICE letter establishes that Libre s was not under investigation in 2013, as falsely represented by BuzzFeed. The November 15, 2015, letter practically endorses Libre s business model. It states, in pertinent part: ICE has no legal authority to investigate or prosecute bail bond companies or other related service providers regarding allegations of inappropriate conduct between two private parties such as an indemnitor and bond company. Complaint, at 10. BuzzFeed s motion to dismiss relies primarily on an affirmative defense. It argues its defamatory statements relating to a HSI investigation of Libre are protected by the fair report 2
3 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 3 of 9 conditional privilege. BuzzFeed seeks judicial notice of an incomplete and fragmentary document. It further argues that it s statement is at least substantially true; that stating an investigation was closed for lack of evidence is not defamatory; and, Libre has not plausibly alleged that BuzzFeed knew the statement is false. BuzzFeed s Special Motion to Dismiss, filed pursuant to the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act, is addressed below in section (5) of this Opposition. LEGAL STANDARD To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007). A claim crosses from conceivable to plausible when it contains factual allegations that, if proved, would allow the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. Banneker Ventures, LLC v. Graham, 798 F.3d 1119, 1129 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (alteration omitted). The court must accept all the well-pleaded factual allegations of the complaint as true and draw all reasonable inferences from those allegations in the plaintiff s favor. Id. In determining whether a complaint fails to state a claim, [the court] may consider only the facts alleged in the complaint, any documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint and matters of which [the court] may take judicial notice. EEOC v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial Sch., 117 F.3d 621, 624 (D.C. Cir. 1997). If the court considers other facts, it must convert the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment and provide the parties with notice and an opportunity to present evidence in support of their respective positions. Kim v. U.S., 632 F.3d 713, 719 (D.C. Cir. 2011); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(d). 3
4 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 4 of 9 ARGUMENT (1) Affirmative Defense BuzzFeed s motion to dismiss relies fundamentally on the merits of its affirmative defense that its defamatory statements are entitled to a conditional privilege. [A]n affirmative defense may be raised by pre-answer motion under Rule 12(b) when the facts that give rise to the defense are clear from the face of the complaint. Smith-Haynie v. D.C., 155 F.3d 575, 578 (D.C. Cir. 1998). However, dismissal of the complaint is improper, as long as a plaintiff s potential rejoinder to the affirmative defense (is not) foreclosed by the allegations in the complaint. De Csepel v. Republic of Hungary, 714 F.3d 591, 608 (D.C. Cir. 2013). BuzzFeed s affirmative defense is that a fair reporting privilege applies because it reported on what it purports is an official record of HSI. Nothing in the complaint forecloses Libre s rejoinder to the affirmative defense. Separate and apart from the allegations of the complaint, BuzzFeed can rebut the affirmative defense by: (i) showing the document BuzzFeed reported on is not entitled to judicial notice since it is incomplete and fragmentary; and (ii) even if the document were admissible, BuzzFeed s reporting is not accurate or complete. Accordingly, BuzzFeed s affirmative defense is not a sufficient basis to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6). (2) Judicial Notice In deciding a motion under Rule 12(b)(6), a court is restricted from considering matters outside the pleadings. See Hinton v. Corr. Corp. of Am, 624 F. Supp. 2d 45, 46 (D.D.C. 2009). However, a court may consider matters about which the Court may take judicial notice. Gustave-Schmidt v. Chao, 226 F. Supp.2d 191, 196 (D.D.C. 2002). A court may take judicial notice of a fact not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within 4
5 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 5 of 9 the territorial jurisdiction of the the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed.R.Evid. 201(b). The document for which BuzzFeed seeks judicial notice is incomplete and lacking in trustworthiness. (Declaration of Chad Bowman, Exhibit A). The document is a single page but indicates it is actually page 2 of a larger document. It is therefore incomplete. Also. BuzzFeed provides no explanation as to why the document is marked as UNAPPROVED. That designation alone raises a serious question about the trustworthiness and authenticity of the document. Judicial notice of a document that is incomplete and marked so as to indicate it is not an approved public record, i.e., unauthenticated, is improper. BuzzFeed has failed to supply the court with necessary information to grant its request for judicial notice. See Fed.R.Evid. 201(c)(2). (3) Fair Report Privilege The fair report privilege grants the right to report defamatory statements in official or public proceedings without liability, provided the report is complete, fair and accurate. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS 611 (1977). This conditional privilege only shields a publisher who fairly and accurately reports. Under D.C. law a publisher must clear[ ] two major hurdles to qualify for the fair report privilege: (i) publication is a fair and accurate report of a qualified government source; and (ii) that the publication properly attributes the statement to the official source. Jankovic v. International Crisis Group, 593 F.3d 22, 26 (D.C. Cir. 2010). The BuzzFeed article refers to internal ICE s in which deportation officers also expressed concerns about some of [Libre s] business model and practices. The purported internal ICE s are not linked to the article and no information is provided to identify them. 5
6 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 6 of 9 The supposed HSI investigation report is actually only page 2 of a larger document that is marked UNAPPROVED. Nevertheless, a reader of the article is left with the impression that deportation officers raised concerns about Libre in an HSI investigation of Libre s business model and practices. Likewise, BuzzFeed s statement that the purported HSI investigation was were eventually closed due to lack of evidence is misleading and inaccurate. The document BuzzFeed seeks to introduce by judicial notice makes no reference to concerns raised by deportation officers, nor does it suggest any efforts were undertaken to collect evidence against Libre. The word evidence is not even used in the document. If the report is garbled or fragmentary to the point where a false imputation is made about the plaintiff which would not be present had a full and accurate report been made the privilege does not apply. Dameron v. Washington Magazine, Inc., 779 F.2d 736, 739 (D.C. Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S (1986) (quoting, Curtis Publishing Co. v. Vaughan, 278 F.2d 23, 29 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 364 U.S. 822 (1960)). The privilege does not protect unattributed, defamatory statements supported after-the-fact through a frantic search of official records. Id. (quoting, Bufalino v. Associated Press, 692 F.2d 266, 271 (2nd Cir. 1982)). And, it is not applicable where the government record is merely part of one s research. Id. (quoting, Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 680 F.2d 527, 536 (7 th Cir. 1982). The intended beneficiary of the fair report privilege is the public, not the press: [t]he privilege is not simply a convenient means for shielding the media from tort liability. Dameron, at 739. BuzzFeed s use of a fragmentary, incomplete document, whose authenticity as an official record is questionable, is not shielded by the fair report privilege as a matter of fact and law. 6
7 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 7 of 9 (4) Defamation In terms of the potential damage to Libre s business reputation, there is a qualitative difference between investigations by the commonwealth attorney and Fairfax City Police Departments, initiated by a disgruntled client and his immigration lawyer, and the purported investigation by ICE/HSI into Libre s business model and practices. 1 As stated, Libre must maintain its critical relationships with bond companies by demonstrating its business practices meet all requirements of the federal government. False statements regarding an investigation by ICE/HSI effects its fundamental business relationships and places its very existence as a commercially viable entity at risk. The complaint alleges with specificity that the statement is false and demonstrates that BuzzFeed knew it was false when it published the defamation by reference to the letter of November 15, 2013, from ICE to Representative Torres. The ICE letter establishes that Libre was not under investigation in 2013, as falsely represented by BuzzFeed. It practically endorses Libre s business model. It states, in pertinent part: ICE has no legal authority to investigate or prosecute bail bond companies or other related service providers regarding allegations of inappropriate conduct between two private parties such as an indemnitor and bond company. Complaint, at 10. The Complaint alleges plausibly that BuzzFeed knew that ICE did not have authority to investigate Libre s operations when it published the statement that Libre was subjected to an ICE investigation. It ignored the letter of November 15, 2013, in order to advocate against Libre s business model and damage its business reputation. 1 The linked document that purports to evidence an investigation by the commonwealth s attorney contains no reference to a commonwealth attorney investigation and is clearly deficient to show any active investigation of Libre by that office. 7
8 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 8 of 9 The complaint also alleges with specificity that BuzzFeed made the false and defamatory statement with full knowledge of its falsity with the intent to cause [Libre] injury to its reputation and client relationships. [BuzzFeed] acted in actual malice and or reckless disregard as to truth or falsity knowing that the falsehood would tend to prejudice [Libre] in the eyes of clients, prospective clients, business partners, bond brokers, bond sureties, prospective business partners and members of the community in general. Complaint, at Accordingly, Libre has properly alleged that BuzzFeed published the defamatory statement with the requisite degree of fault. Malice may be inferred from the alleged facts that BuzzFeed was in possession of the letter of November 15, 2015, wherein ICE states it has not investigated Libre s business practices. Complaint, at 10. BuzzFeed consciously decided not to report that the incomplete and unauthenticated government report it relied on was contradicted, in its entirety, by a subsequent letter from ICE to a member of Congress (5) Special Motion to Dismiss (D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act) BuzzFeed additionally moves for dismissal pursuant to the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act of 2010 (D.C. Code (a). BuzzFeed concludes that the decision of the D.C. Court of Appeals in Competitive Enter. Inst. v. Mann, 150 A.3d 1213 (D.C. 2016), clearly and unmistakably renders inaccurate the prior decision of the D.C. Circuit in Abbas v. Foreign Policy Grp., LLP, 783 F.3d 1328 (D.C. Cir. 2015). The Abbas court foreclosed application of the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act in diversity cases. As pointed out in BuzzFeed s Notice of Supplemental Authorities [ECF No. 10], a recent decision of this court in Deripaska v. Associated Press, 17-cv-913 (D.D.C. Oct. 17, 2017) addresses the question of whether Abbas still offers clear guidance on the applicability of the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act. 8
9 Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 9 of 9 In Deripaska, Judge Huvelle emphasized that the Abbas court was aware that other federal courts of appeal had come to a different conclusion when analyzing other states Anti- SLAPP statutes in similar circumstances. Id., 4. Nonetheless, the D.C. Circuit expressed agreement with the view that Federal Rules 12 and 56 answer the same question as the Anti- SLAPP Act s special motion to dismiss provision. Id., at 5. BuzzFeed s interpretation of Mann and Abbas is directly contradicted by Deripaska wherein the court found that Mann does not clearly and unmistakably resolve the question at issue and ruled that the court must follow the clear guidance of the D.C. Circuit in Abbas and deny the special motion to dismiss. Id. Nonetheless, as shown above, the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act would not be applicable even were it relevant to these proceedings. Libre has clearly shown a strong likelihood of success on the merits given that BuzzFeed s affirmative defense of a fair report privilege is facially flawed; and that Libre has plausibly alleged defamation colored by malice and/or reckless disregard. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, Libre respectfully requests that the Motion to Dismiss and Special Motion to Dismiss be denied. Dated: November 16, 2017 Respectfully submitted, /s/john M. Shoreman John M. Shoreman (DC ) McFADDEN & SHOREMAN 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 500 Washington, DC (202) Fax (202) mstlaw@erols.com Counsel for Plaintiff Libre By Nexus, Inc. 9
Case 1:17-cv APM Document 15 Filed 05/16/18 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:17-cv-01460-APM Document 15 Filed 05/16/18 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) LIBRE BY NEXUS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 17-cv-01460 (APM) ) BUZZFEED,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA - Alexandria Division -
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA - Alexandria Division - IN RE: BLACKWATER ALIEN TORT CLAIMS ACT LITIGATION Case No. 1:09-cv-615 Case No. 1:09-cv-616 Case No. 1:09-cv-617
More informationCase 1:12-cv UU Document 61 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/30/2013 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 1:12-cv-23300-UU Document 61 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/30/2013 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PATRICE BAKER and LAURENT LAMOTHE Case No. 12-cv-23300-UU Plaintiffs,
More informationCase 1:17-cv DPG Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/30/2018 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 1:17-cv-20713-DPG Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/30/2018 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 17-cv-20713-GAYLES/OTAZO-REYES RICHARD KURZBAN, v. Plaintiff,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : : : : : : : : : : : : :
OLIREI INVESTMENTS, LLC v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 14 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY OLIREI INVESTMENTS, LLC v. Plaintiff, LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE
More informationCase: 1:18-cv Document #: 18 Filed: 10/03/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:55
Case: 1:18-cv-04586 Document #: 18 Filed: 10/03/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:55 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION MELISSA RUEDA, individually and on
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION
Kinard v. Greenville Police Department et al Doc. 26 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION Ira Milton Kinard, ) ) Plaintiff, ) C.A. No. 6:10-cv-03246-JMC
More informationCase 7:06-cv TJM-GJD Document 15 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 1 of 10. Plaintiff, Defendants. DECISION & ORDER
Case 7:06-cv-01289-TJM-GJD Document 15 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK PAUL BOUSHIE, Plaintiff, -against- 06-CV-1289 U.S. INVESTIGATIONS SERVICE,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 2:12-cv-04891-WJM-MF Document 16 Filed 09/12/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID: 782 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY IRIS GILLON and IRIS GILLON MUSIC N CELEBRATIONS, LLC d/b/a IGMC,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ADVANCED PHYSICIANS S.C., VS. Plaintiff, CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., Defendants. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-2355-G
More informationCase 2:16-cv JCC Document 17 Filed 03/22/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE
Case :-cv-0-jcc Document Filed 0// Page of THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 0 JASON E. WINECKA, NATALIE D. WINECKA, WINECKA TRUST,
More informationCase: 1:13-cv Document #: 9 Filed: 04/11/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:218
Case: 1:13-cv-01569 Document #: 9 Filed: 04/11/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:218 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PAUL DUFFY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. )
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION : : : : : : : : : : : : ORDER
Case 213-cv-00155-RWS Document 9 Filed 02/27/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION OVIDIU CONSTANTIN, v. Plaintiff, WELLS FARGO BANK,
More informationCase 2:18-cv KJD-CWH Document 7 Filed 12/26/18 Page 1 of 7
Case :-cv-0-kjd-cwh Document Filed // Page of 0 MICHAEL R. BROOKS, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 0 HUNTER S. DAVIDSON, ESQ. Nevada Bar No. 0 KOLESAR & LEATHAM 00 South Rampart Boulevard, Suite 00 Las Vegas, Nevada
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA JOHN G. JULIA, Plaintiff, v. ELEXCO LAND SERVICES, INC. and SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY PRODUCTION COMPANY, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:09-CV-590
More informationCase 1:17-cv TNM Document 14 Filed 01/12/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:17-cv-00258-TNM Document 14 Filed 01/12/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA TIMOTHY W. SHARPE, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:17-cv-00258 (TNM) AMERICAN ACADEMY OF
More information: : Plaintiff James Tagliaferri, acting pro se, sues Matthew J. Szulik and Kyle M. Szulik
Tagliaferri v. Szulik et al Doc. 35 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------X JAMES TAGLIAFERRI, Plaintiff, -against- MATTHEW
More informationCase: 1:15-cv Document #: 34 Filed: 01/20/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:132
Case: 1:15-cv-07694 Document #: 34 Filed: 01/20/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:132 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION VICTOR J. EVANS, Plaintiff, v. No.
More informationCase 1:12-cv ABJ Document 14 Filed 06/19/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:12-cv-01369-ABJ Document 14 Filed 06/19/13 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DELONTE EMILIANO TRAZELL Plaintiff, vs. ROBERT G. WILMERS, et al. Defendants.
More informationFILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 06/29/ :28 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/29/2017
In the Term of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for Kings County at the Courthouse thereof located at 360 Adams Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201 LIBRE BY NEXUS, INC., ) 113 Mill Place
More informationCase 1:13-cv LPS Document 34 Filed 07/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 964
Case 1:13-cv-01186-LPS Document 34 Filed 07/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 964 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ROSALYN JOHNSON Plaintiff, V. Civ. Act. No. 13-1186-LPS ACE
More informationCase 3:13-cv L Document 109 Filed 08/21/15 Page 1 of 11 PageID 3052
Case 3:13-cv-02920-L Document 109 Filed 08/21/15 Page 1 of 11 PageID 3052 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION INFECTIOUS DISEASE DOCTORS, P.A., Plaintiff, v.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendant.
Case :-cv-00-ben-ksc Document 0 Filed 0// PageID.0 Page of 0 0 ANDREA NATHAN, on behalf of herself, all others similarly situated, v. VITAMIN SHOPPE, INC., UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT
More informationCase 3:11-cv DPJ -FKB Document 26 Filed 01/05/12 Page 1 of 10
Case 3:11-cv-00332-DPJ -FKB Document 26 Filed 01/05/12 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI JACKSON DIVISION AUGUSTUS P. SORIANO PLAINTIFF V. CIVIL
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Chieftain Royalty Company v. Marathon Oil Company Doc. 41 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA CHIEFTAIN ROYALTY COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-17-334-SPS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendants.
Case :-cv-000-wqh-bgs Document Filed 0/0/ PageID. Page of 0 0 SEAN K. WHITE, v. NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION; EQUIFAX, INC.; EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC.; EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; TRANSUNION,
More informationCase 1:09-cv NMG Document 29 Filed 12/01/2009 Page 1 of 12. United States District Court District of Massachusetts MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Case 1:09-cv-10555-NMG Document 29 Filed 12/01/2009 Page 1 of 12 STEPHANIE CATANZARO, Plaintiff, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., TRANS UNION, LLC and VERIZON NEW ENGLAND, INC. Defendants. GORTON,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation et al v. Hitachi Ltd et al Doc. 101 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC TOOL CORPORATION, METCO BATTERY TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
More informationCase 3:12-cv ARC Document 34 Filed 06/05/13 Page 1 of 9
Case 3:12-cv-00576-ARC Document 34 Filed 06/05/13 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ROBERT A. LINCOLN and MARY O. LINCOLN, Plaintiffs, v. MAGNUM LAND
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA NORINE SYLVIA CAVE, Plaintiff, v. DELTA DENTAL OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-who ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS Re: Dkt. No.,,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 1:15-cv-05617 Document #: 23 Filed: 10/21/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:68 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION THOMAS HENRY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v.
More informationCase 0:17-cv WPD Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/11/2017 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:17-cv-61266-WPD Document 16 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/11/2017 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA SILVIA LEONES, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated,
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84
Case: 1:16-cv-04522 Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION LISA SKINNER, Plaintiff, v. Case No.
More informationCase 3:09-cv ARC Document 17 Filed 05/03/2010 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 3:09-cv-00589-ARC Document 17 Filed 05/03/2010 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CHARLES PUZA, JR., and FRANCES CLEMENTS, Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL
More informationCase 1:17-cv NMG Document 60 Filed 09/27/18 Page 1 of 18. United States District Court District of Massachusetts
Case 1:17-cv-10007-NMG Document 60 Filed 09/27/18 Page 1 of 18 NORMA EZELL, LEONARD WHITLEY, and ERICA BIDDINGS, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. LEXINGTON INSURANCE
More informationSUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION. Case No CA B v. Judge Robert R. Rigsby ) ) ) ) ) ORDER
SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIVIL DIVISION ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff, Case No. 2017 CA 008375 B v. Judge Robert R. Rigsby THE BIGELOW TEA COMPANY, F/K/A R.C. BIGELOW INC.,
More informationCase 3:13-cv DRH-SCW Document 13 Filed 04/11/13 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #311
Case 3:13-cv-00207-DRH-SCW Document 13 Filed 04/11/13 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #311 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PRENDA LAW, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 13-cv-00207
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII PROPERTY RIGHTS LAW GROUP, P.C., an Illinois Professional Corporation, vs. Plaintiffs, SANDRA D. LYNCH, JOHN KANG, alias Lee Miller; and KEALA
More informationCase 4:18-cv HSG Document 46 Filed 02/07/19 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0-hsg Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 NITA BATRA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. POPSUGAR, INC., Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-hsg ORDER DENYING
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE KENNETH M. SEATON d/b/a ) GRAND RESORT HOTEL AND ) CONVENTION CENTER ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 3:11-cv-00549
More informationCase 1:16-cv KLM Document 26 Filed 07/05/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO ORDER
Case 1:16-cv-02000-KLM Document 26 Filed 07/05/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 18 Civil Action No. 16-cv-02000-KLM GARY THUROW, v. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
More informationCase 1:17-cv BRW-CSM Document 79 Filed 03/30/18 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:17-cv-00173-BRW-CSM Document 79 Filed 03/30/18 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA WESTERN DIVISION ENERGY TRANSFER EQUITY, L.P., and ENERGY TRANSFER
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 6:10-cv-00414-GAP-DAB Document 102 Filed 01/23/12 Page 1 of 8 PageID 726 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. and NURDEEN MUSTAFA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Plaintiffs,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV B MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ARTHUR LOPEZ, individually, and on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated individuals Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION
More informationCase 2:11-cv DDP-MRW Document 23 Filed 02/19/13 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:110 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0-ddp-mrw Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #:0 O NO JS- UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 JULIE ZEMAN, on behalf of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff, USC
More informationCase 1:15-cv KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:15-cv-01927-KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 Civil Action No. 15-cv-01927-KLM IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO GINA M. KILPATRICK, individually
More informationCase 4:16-cv Document 27 Filed in TXSD on 06/06/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 4:16-cv-03577 Document 27 Filed in TXSD on 06/06/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED
More informationPLEADING IN FEDERAL COURT AFTER ASHCROFT v. IQBAL by Paul Ferrer
PLEADING IN FEDERAL COURT AFTER ASHCROFT v. IQBAL by Paul Ferrer LEGAL RESEARCH, ANALYSIS, AND ADVOCACY FOR ATTORNEYS Founded in 1969, NLRG is the nation s oldest and largest provider of legal research
More informationCourthouse News Service
Case 3:07-cv-01782-L Document 87 Filed 07/10/2009 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION JOMAR OIL LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ENERGYTEC INC., et al.,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ORDER AND REASONS
Kareem v. Markel Southwest Underwriters, Inc., et. al. Doc. 45 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA AMY KAREEM d/b/a JACKSON FASHION, LLC VERSUS MARKEL SOUTHWEST UNDERWRITERS, INC.
More informationCase 4:15-cv ALM-CAN Document 13 Filed 09/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 58 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION
Case 4:15-cv-00571-ALM-CAN Document 13 Filed 09/17/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 58 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION PRUVIT VENTURES, LLC, Plaintiff, vs. AXCESS GLOBAL
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PAUL REIN, Plaintiff, v. LEON AINER, et al., Defendants. Case No. -cv-0-jd ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS AND DENYING MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MEMORANDUM OPINION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CASSANDRA FAIRBANKS, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:17-cv-01052 (TNM) EMMA ROLLER, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Cassandra Fairbanks trolled
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Wallace v. DSG Missouri, LLC Doc. 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS JOSEPH WALLACE, Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 15-cv-00923-JPG-SCW DSG MISSOURI, LLC, Defendant.
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Argued: October 2, 2015 Decided: December 8, 2015) Docket No.
--cv 0 0 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 0 (Argued: October, 0 Decided: December, 0) Docket No. cv PETER PAUL BIRO, Plaintiff Appellant, v. CONDÉ NAST, a division of
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case CIV-WPD ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS
1 Erbey and Faris will be collectively referred to as the Individual Defendants. Case 9:14-cv-81057-WPD Document 81 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/22/2015 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 16-60414 Document: 00513846420 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/24/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Summary Calendar SONJA B. HENDERSON, on behalf of the Estate and Wrongful
More informationZervos v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Dist. Court, D. Maryland In Re: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10)
Zervos v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Dist. Court, D. Maryland 2012 MEMORANDUM JAMES K. BREDAR, District Judge. CHRISTINE ZERVOS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, Defendant. Civil No. 1:11-cv-03757-JKB.
More informationCase 9:16-cv KAM Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/24/2017 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 9:16-cv-81973-KAM Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/24/2017 Page 1 of 13 MIGUEL RIOS AND SHIRLEY H. RIOS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 16-81973-CIV-MARRA/MATTHEWMAN
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND. On June 2, pro se Plaintiff Keyonna Ferrell ("Ferrell")
Ferrell v. Google Doc. 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND KEYONNA FERRELL, Plaintiff, v. GOOGLE, Civil Action No. TDC-15-1604 Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION On June 2, 2015. pro se Plaintiff
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Radke, v. Sinha Clinic Corp., et al. Doc. 55 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EX REL. ) DEBORAH RADKE, as relator under the
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendants.
Case :-cv-0-l-nls Document Filed 0// PageID. Page of 0 0 JASON DAVID BODIE v. LYFT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, Defendants. Case No.: :-cv-0-l-nls ORDER GRANTING
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN DEREK GUBALA, Case No. 15-cv-1078-pp Plaintiff, v. TIME WARNER CABLE, INC., Defendant. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION DORIS LOTT, Plaintiff, v. No. 15-00439-CV-W-DW LVNV FUNDING LLC, et al., Defendants. ORDER Before the Court is Defendants
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA SPARTANBURG DIVISION ' '
THE MARSHALL TUCKER BAND, INC. and DOUG GRAY, Plaintiffs, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA SPARTANBURG DIVISION vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 7:16-00420-MGL M T INDUSTRIES,
More informationCase 2:17-cv JNP-BCW Document 29 Filed 01/08/19 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
Case 2:17-cv-01203-JNP-BCW Document 29 Filed 01/08/19 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH R. FLOYD ASHER, v. Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION
More informationCase 1:10-cv CFL Document 41 Filed 09/27/12 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
Case 1:10-cv-00733-CFL Document 41 Filed 09/27/12 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS ) AEY, INC., ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 10-733 C ) (Judge Lettow) UNITED STATES, ) Defendant. ) ) DEFENDANT
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Case :0-cv-000-KJD-LRL Document Filed 0//0 Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 0 THE CUPCAKERY, LLC, Plaintiff, v. ANDREA BALLUS, et al., Defendants. Case No. :0-CV-00-KJD-LRL ORDER
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Morales v. United States of America Doc. 10 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : NICHOLAS MORALES, JR., : : Plaintiff, : v. : Civil Action No. 3:17-cv-2578-BRM-LGH
More informationCase 3:17-cv JLH Document 20 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION
Case 3:17-cv-00327-JLH Document 20 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION TURNING POINT USA AT ARKANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY; and ASHLYN
More informationCase 3:17-cv RS Document 33 Filed 08/28/17 Page 1 of 8
Case :-cv-0-rs Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 TODD GREENBERG, v. Plaintiff, TARGET CORPORATION, Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA I. INTRODUCTION Case No. -cv-0-rs
More informationCase3:14-cv WHO Document64 Filed03/03/15 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case:-cv-0-WHO Document Filed0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STEPHEN WYNN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. JAMES CHANOS, Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-who ORDER GRANTING MOTION
More informationAneka Myrick v. Discover Bank
2016 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 10-7-2016 Aneka Myrick v. Discover Bank Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2016
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 12/12/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:61 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 1:16-cv-04979 Document #: 21 Filed: 12/12/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:61 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION KENYA and APRIL ELSTON ) as legal guardians of their
More informationCase 9:09-cv RC Document 100 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 991 **NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION**
Case 9:09-cv-00124-RC Document 100 Filed 08/10/12 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 991 **NOT FOR PRINTED PUBLICATION** IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION UNITED
More informationCase: 4:15-cv RWS Doc. #: 30 Filed: 05/04/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 183
Case: 4:15-cv-00464-RWS Doc. #: 30 Filed: 05/04/15 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 183 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION GRYPHON INVESTMENTS III, LLC, Plaintiff, Case No.
More informationCase 3:09-cv ARC Document 537 Filed 07/09/2010 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Case 3:09-cv-00286-ARC Document 537 Filed 07/09/2010 Page 1 of 9 FLORENCE WALLACE, et al., ROBERT J. POWELL, et al., CONSOLIDATED TO: CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:09-CV-286 WILLIAM CONWAY, et al., JUDGE MICHAEL
More informationCase 1:11-cv RJS Document 283 Filed 02/10/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 111-cv-09645-RJS Document 283 Filed 02/10/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, -v- No. 11 Civ. 9645 (RJS) ELEK
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) No. 4:17-cv JAR ) ) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Doe v. Francis Howell School District Doc. 35 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION JANE DOE, Plaintiff, v. No. 4:17-cv-01301-JAR FRANCIS HOWELL SCHOOL DISTRICT, et
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 1:09-cv-07704 Document #: 46 Filed: 03/12/13 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:293 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATE OF AMERICA, ex rel.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Presently before the Court is Defendants Connecticut General
Mountain View Surgical Center v. CIGNA Health and Life Insurance Company et al Doc. 1 O UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 1 1 1 1 1 1 MOUNTAIN VIEW SURGICAL CENTER, a California
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case 2:16-cv-00862-RGK-JC Document 112 Filed 06/14/16 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:4432 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. 16-CV-00862 RGK (JCx) Date
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiffs, ) Civil Action No. 8:08-cv PJM ) Defendants.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISION ) WISSAM ABDULLATEFF SA EED ) AL-QURAISHI, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) Civil Action No. 8:08-cv-01696-PJM ) v. ) ) ABEL
More informationCase3:14-cv RS Document48 Filed01/06/15 Page1 of 10
Case:-cv-000-RS Document Filed0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SCOTT KOLLER, Plaintiff, v. MED FOODS, INC., et al., Defendants. I. INTRODUCTION Case No. -cv-000-rs
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * * Plaintiff(s), Defendant(s).
Western National Insurance Group v. Hanlon et al Doc. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA * * * 0 WESTERN NATIONAL INSURANCE GROUP, v. CARRIE M. HANLON, ESQ., et al., Plaintiff(s), Defendant(s).
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13-cv-446-MOC-DSC
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13-cv-446-MOC-DSC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION,
More informationCase 2:15-cv SDW-SCM Document 10 Filed 05/21/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 287 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY OPINION
Case 2:15-cv-00314-SDW-SCM Document 10 Filed 05/21/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 287 NOT FOR PUBLICATION JOSE ESPAILLAT, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Plaintiff, DEUTSCHE BANK
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel
Duke-Roser v. Sisson, et al., Doc. 19 Civil Action No. 12-cv-02414-WYD-KMT KIMBERLY DUKE-ROSSER, v. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE. RECOMMENDED DECISION AFTER SCREENING COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C.
ROSS v. YORK COUNTY JAIL Doc. 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE JOHN P. ROSS, ) ) Plaintiff ) ) 2:17-cv-00338-NT v. ) ) YORK COUNTY JAIL, ) ) Defendant ) RECOMMENDED DECISION AFTER SCREENING
More informationCase 3:10-cv KRG Document 28 Filed 03/25/11 Page 1 of 10
Case 3:10-cv-00013-KRG Document 28 Filed 03/25/11 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DARRELL DUFOUR & Civil Action No.3: 10-cv-00013 KATHY DUFOUR
More informationv. Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-560
Case 1:12-cv-00560-CMH-TCB Document 100 Filed 08/06/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID# 697 YASSER GABER ABOU EL HADIED MOHAMED ALI, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Plaintiff,
More information2:07-cv RMG Date Filed 06/24/09 Entry Number 156 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
2:07-cv-00410-RMG Date Filed 06/24/09 Entry Number 156 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA JOSE PADILLA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, et al.,
More informationCase3:14-cv MEJ Document39 Filed10/30/14 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION
Case:-cv-0-MEJ Document Filed/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SERENA KWAN, Plaintiff, v. SANMEDICA INTERNATIONAL, LLC, Defendant. Case No. -cv-0-mej ORDER RE: MOTION
More informationCase 1:12-cv JCC-TRJ Document 27 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 168
Case 1:12-cv-00396-JCC-TRJ Document 27 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 168 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division CYBERLOCK CONSULTING, INC., )
More informationCase: 1:15-cv Document #: 65 Filed: 12/22/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:237
Case: 1:15-cv-04300 Document #: 65 Filed: 12/22/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:237 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION KENNETH NEIMAN, Plaintiff, v. THE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiffs,
Case :-cv-0-ajb-bgs Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 ROSE MARIE RENO and LARRY ANDERSON, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiffs, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
More informationCase 0:16-cv WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 0:16-cv-61856-WPD Document 64 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2017 Page 1 of 11 JENNIFER SANDOVAL, vs. Plaintiff, RONALD R. WOLFE & ASSOCIATES, P.L., SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC., and NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE,
More informationPlaintiffs' Response to Individual Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice
Plaintiffs' Response to Individual Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice Source: Milberg Weiss Date: 11/15/01 Time: 9:36 AM MILBERG WEISS BERSHAD HYNES & LERACH LLP REED R. KATHREIN (139304 LESLEY E.
More informationVs. C : PARISH OF JEFFERSON DAVIS JACOB COLBY PERRY : STATE OF LOUISIANA FILED: : DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
CAROLYN LOUVIERE : 31 st JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT Vs. C-056817 : PARISH OF JEFFERSON DAVIS JACOB COLBY PERRY : STATE OF LOUISIANA FILED: : DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION TO STRIKE OF JACOB
More informationCase: 1:10-cv Document #: 38 Filed: 01/13/11 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:167 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Case: 1:10-cv-04723 Document #: 38 Filed: 01/13/11 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:167 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS FRANCIS J. SAVARIRAYAN, M.D., Plaintiff, Case No. 1:10-CV-04723
More information