Northern District of Illinois
Oliver et al v. Pennymac is a civil case in the Northern District of Illinois, docket 25-cv-15694. The latest filing is an order on a motion for miscellaneous relief, reflecting ongoing procedural rulings.
Explore the full federal litigation docket tracked by Juryvine. Our database covers filings across all 94 federal district courts, 13 circuit courts of appeals, and the Supreme Court — kept current from primary court records. Filter by case type, status, or court level to find the cases that matter to your practice.
42477 cases tracked · 42476 currently active
Showing 20 of 33210 matching cases
Northern District of Illinois
Oliver et al v. Pennymac is a civil case in the Northern District of Illinois, docket 25-cv-15694. The latest filing is an order on a motion for miscellaneous relief, reflecting ongoing procedural rulings.
District of Delaware
In the District of Delaware, 3D Communications, LLC filed a notice to take a deposition in its case against Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics, Inc. This action signals that discovery is proceeding, with parties seeking to gather sworn testimony from witnesses. The notice outlines the intent to depose an individual related
District of Columbia
A notice of substitution of counsel was filed in the District of Columbia for the case of RUDOMETKIN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. This filing means that the legal representation for one of the parties has changed. The specific reasons for the substitution are not provided.
Northern District of Illinois
USA v. Jimenez et al is a criminal case in the Northern District of Illinois with docket 15-cr-00526. The current filing includes an amended complaint and amended notice of removal, suggesting procedural updates or expanded charges.
Southern District of Florida
USA v. Gribble, et al is a criminal case pending in the Southern District of Florida under docket 25-cr-80187. The latest filing is a notice of a hearing on a motion, indicating active litigation and pending judicial decisions.
Western District of Washington
The case of Duke University v. The Partnerships Identified on Schedule A in the Western District of Washington has been assigned or reassigned. This docket entry indicates a change in the judicial officer overseeing the case or a transfer between court divisions. It does not provide details on the substance of the
District of New Jersey
Civil case in D.N.J. currently marked active.
District of New Jersey
LAURINO et al v. THE VALLEY HOSPITAL et al in the District of New Jersey has a joint discovery plan filed. This indicates the parties have collaborated to outline their strategy for exchanging information and evidence. The plan is a procedural step to manage the discovery process effectively.
District of New Jersey
The case of LABORERS' LOCAL UNION NOS. 472 AND 172 AND LABORERS' LOCAL UNION NOS. 472 AND 172 WELFARE AND PENSION FUNDS AND SAFETY, EDUCATION AND TRAINING FUNDS et al v. MIKE FITZPATRICK CONTRACTORS in the District of New Jersey has been terminated. This docket entry signifies the conclusion of the legal proceedings.
District of Massachusetts
C.E.B. INC. v. HCL America Inc. et al in the District of Massachusetts has a memorandum and order filed. This indicates a substantive judicial decision has been made and communicated to the parties. The order likely addresses a specific motion or issue within the litigation.
District of Massachusetts
A motion for an extension of time to indict has been filed in the District of Massachusetts for UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Vicioso Fernandez et al. This filing indicates the prosecution is seeking additional time before formally indicting the defendants. Such motions are typically made when investigations are ongoing
District of Massachusetts
Wentz v. Moderna, Inc. et al in the District of Massachusetts has an order referring the case to a Magistrate Judge. This means a judicial officer with limited jurisdiction will handle certain aspects of the case, such as discovery disputes or dispositive motions. The referral is a procedural step to manage the
District of Massachusetts
United States Liability Insurance Company v. Community Brotherhood of Lynn, Inc. et al in the District of Massachusetts has an unspecified filing. The docket entry does not detail the nature of the filing. This suggests routine administrative or procedural activity within the case.
District of Massachusetts
A notice of hearing for an initial appearance has been filed in the District of Delaware for USA v. Muzzi. This filing indicates that the defendant is scheduled to appear before the court for the first time in this criminal matter. It signifies the formal start of court proceedings.
District of Massachusetts
The United States of America v. Gallagher in the District of Massachusetts has a filing indicating withdrawal as attorney. This means a legal representative has formally ended their role in representing a party. The court filing details the procedural step of counsel's departure.
District of Massachusetts
An order canceling a deadline was issued in the District of Massachusetts for Shash et al v. Biogen Inc. et al. This filing indicates a modification to the case's schedule, likely impacting discovery or motion practice. The reason for the cancellation is not specified.
District of Massachusetts
Nested Bean, Inc. v. The United States of America in the District of Massachusetts has had a notice of case assignment filed. This indicates the case has been officially placed on the court's docket and assigned to a specific judge or magistrate. The filing marks a formal beginning of judicial oversight.
District of Delaware
USA v. Zapet-Ambrosio is pending in the District of Delaware under docket number 25-mj-00705. The case is active, but no specific filings or charges have been made public.
District of Delaware
USA v. Fajardo Infante is an active criminal case in the District of Delaware, docket number 25-mj-00489. No further details on charges or proceedings have been disclosed.
Southern District of New York
Spencer has filed a stipulation and proposed order in its case against City Towers LTD et al. The filing suggests the parties are seeking to resolve certain aspects of the litigation. The specific terms of the proposed order are not detailed in the provided summary.