Browse Cases

Northern District of California

Plaintiff Ramirez filed a motion to terminate the civil case against Monterey County Jail and Mental Health in the Northern District of California. The motion argues the case lacks merit or has been resolved, signaling a potential end to litigation or dismissal.

Northern District of California

An administrative motion was filed under Civil Local Rule 7-11 in the In re Google RTB Consumer Privacy Litigation in the Northern District of California. The motion addresses procedural issues, reflecting ongoing case management in this complex privacy litigation.

Northern District of California

Parties in Tull v. Jenkins submitted a stipulation and proposed order in the Northern District of California. The filing outlines agreed procedural steps and mutual agreements, helping the next phase of litigation without revealing substantive dispute details.

Northern District of California

The court granted an extension for filing responses or replies in Norris v. Madame Rouge Corporation in the Northern District of California. This procedural order indicates ongoing litigation activity but does not reveal details about the underlying dispute or claims.

Northern District of California

FEUMBA v. QUIGLEY in the Northern District of California reached a procedural milestone with the filing of a status report. The report likely updates the court on case progress, pending motions, or settlement talks, but no substantive details about claims or defenses are currently available.

Northern District of California

Laborers Trust Funds for Southern California Administrative Company changed counsel in its suit against Eagle Contractors, Inc. in the Northern District of California. The case likely involves claims related to labor agreements or contributions to trust funds, but the recent activity centers on legal representation

Northern District of California

Plaintiffs Brown and others filed an administrative motion under Civil Local Rule 7-11 in litigation against Google LLC. The motion addresses procedural or administrative issues in the case pending in the Northern District of California. The docket number is 20-cv-03664.

Northern District of California

Plaintiffs Anderson and others filed a status report in their civil suit against the City and County of San Francisco in the Northern District of California. The report provides an update on the litigation's progress and recent developments. The case number is 20-cv-01149.

Northern District of California

A status report was filed in the civil litigation Doe v. Stanford Federal Credit Union in the Northern District of California. The report updates the court on case developments, pending matters, and actions taken by the parties. The docket number is 25-cv-07241.

Northern District of California

Plaintiff Pifferini filed a motion to alter judgment in a civil case against the City of Eureka in the Northern District of California. The motion seeks to modify or overturn a prior judgment, potentially based on new evidence or legal arguments. The case is docketed as 24-cv-09191.

Central District of California

The United States Court of Appeals issued a memorandum in the Darren Norman v. C. Wu civil case in the Central District of California. This memorandum marks a procedural milestone, possibly addressing appellate issues or clarifying legal positions. The case number is 17-cv-05299.

Northern District of California

Trimble Inc. filed a motion to terminate litigation against Unity Software in the Northern District of California. The motion seeks to close the case, likely reflecting settlement or resolution between the parties. The case number is 25-cv-10401.

Central District of California

The Central District of California court granted a motion for reconsideration in the Yeezy LLC civil case, allowing the parties to submit new arguments or evidence. This procedural development reopens issues previously decided. The case is docketed as 24-cv-05547.

Central District of California

Majestic Realty and Conway submitted a joint discovery plan in the Central District of California to comply with Rule 26(f). The plan aims to organize and streamline discovery, ensuring both parties meet court deadlines and procedural requirements. The case number is 25-cv-10154.

Northern District of California

Villafana filed for miscellaneous relief in a civil case pending in the Northern District of California. The specific relief sought remains unspecified, suggesting a broad or procedural request within the litigation. The case docket number is 25-cv-01310.

Central District of California

Soho Hotel Owner, LLC sued the United States Small Business Administration (SBA) in the Central District of California, challenging agency actions that affected the plaintiff. The dispute likely involves SBA loan programs or administrative decisions impacting Soho Hotel Owner's business interests. A recent court

Central District of California

Proof of service was filed in Sexton v. Superhumn, Inc. in the Central District of California, confirming that legal documents were properly served on defendants. This procedural step advances the civil case by establishing that defendants received notice. The case continues with active litigation.

Central District of California

The court granted a motion to dismiss in Milan Hassid v. Alex and Ani, LLC, terminating the lawsuit. The dismissal ends the plaintiff's claims against the defendants in the Central District of California. The ruling resolves the dispute without trial or further proceedings.

Central District of California

Franz Haas GmbH/srl v. Winebow Inc. proceeds under a United States Court of Appeals (USCA) mandate in the Central District of California. The case follows appellate instructions, indicating ongoing compliance with higher court orders. The docket reflects continued litigation consistent with the mandate.

Central District of California

A request for attorney appearance or reassignment was filed in a sealed criminal case in the Central District of California. The filing indicates a change or confirmation in legal representation for a defendant in a federal criminal matter. Details remain confidential due to the sealed status.