⚖ SoapBox law
CasesDocketsStatutesRegulationsJudgesLawyersFile a complaintOversightDataLibrary

Cases

Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.

5 opinions for “Ager v. 3M Company”

Wilson v. PTT, LLCpublic domain
District Court, W.D. Washington · 2018-12-14 · Published · cited 6× · 351 F. Supp. 3d 1325
Ronald B. Leighton, United States District Judge INTRODUCTION THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant PTT, LLC's ("High 5") Motion to Dismiss. Dkt. # 34. The underlying dispute is a class action to recover money lost playing electronic gambling games available through mobile apps. High 5 argues that the Complaint should be dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction and failure to state a clai
Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010-12-28 · Published · cited 13× · 792 N.W.2d 836; 2010 Minn. App. LEXIS 187; 2010 WL 5292065
OPINION STONEBURNER, Judge. In 2001, appellants sued respondents Altria Group Inc. (Atria) (formerly Philip Morris Companies Inc.) and Philip Morris Incorporated (Philip Morris) under Minn. Stat. § 8.31, subd. 3a,1 seeking damages and other relief, individually and on behalf of a class, alleging false advertising, consumer fraud, and deceptive trade practices regarding “light”
Texas Court of Appeals, 15th District · 2025-08-21 · Published · cited 0×
ACCEPTED 15-25-00051-cv FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 8/21/2025 6:22 PM NO. 15-25-00051-CV CHRISTOPHER A.
Court of Appeals of Texas · 2015-01-23 · Published · cited 0×
•>mpiMAl onf pii\l A I UKtbllNSnL Couer Shs&k. /Y59VY /Able /Icosfo^ Cieck Cou<4 Of Cnwioal Appeals £upr£(v\t Ccuri blelg PC &CX l220«-23og' FILED IN .RECEIVED IN MOTX 7*7//' COURTO^NALAPPEALS COURTOF«NALAPPEALS jAN 2 3 2015 JAN 20 2015 U£6r LlerK^ Abel Acosta, Clerk Abel Acosta, Clerk koel
District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2013-09-23 · Published · cited 4× · 986 F. Supp. 2d 574; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135208; 2013 WL 5332108
OPINION NORA BARRY FISCHER, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This is a patent infringement case brought by Plaintiff, Carnegie Mellon University (“CMU”), against Defendants Marvell Technology Group, Ltd. and Marvell *582Semiconductor, Inc. (collectively “Marvell”), alleging that Marvell has infringed two of its patents