More like this
Vuori Sues 24 Counterfeit Websites Using Its Name
Wilkie D. Ferguson Jr. U.S. Courthouse, 400, North Miami Avenue, Torch of Friendship, Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida, 33128, United StatesVuori
CONFIRMED88% CONFIDENCE262 days agoThe docket's first entry is the complaint 'filed by Vuori, Inc.' with filing fee receipt, '(Entered: 01/05/2026)'.[1]Vuori filed a trademark suit in Miami federal court against the anonymous owners of 24 look-alike web shops such as vuoriclothing-outlets.shop and vuoriactivewear.com, seeking to freeze and seize them.0.66Two Former Workers File New Overtime Class Action Against Vuori
James M. Carter & Judith N. Keep Courthouse, 333, West Broadway, Downtown San Diego, San Diego, San Diego County, California, 92101, United States
CONFIRMED86% CONFIDENCE258 days agoLaw360's[1] case box lists Ho et al v. Vuori, Inc., 3:26-cv-00123, 'Date Filed: January 09, 2026'.Mayeli Ho and Katie Felix sued Vuori in San Diego federal court, alleging it miscalculated overtime premiums, the claim at the heart of the Northern District case dismissed a day earlier.0.65Vuori Sues the US Government for a Refund of IEEPA Tariffs
James L. Watson U.S. Court of International Trade Building, 1, Lafayette Street, Civic Center, Lower Manhattan, Manhattan, New York County, New York, 10007, United States
CONFIRMED84% CONFIDENCE177 days agoThe docket's first entry is 'Complaint against All Defendants. Answer due by 6/1/2026. Filed by Samuel D. Finkelstein of LMD Trade Law PLLC on behalf of Vuori, Inc. (Entered: 03/31/2026)'.[1]Vuori filed suit at the US Court of International Trade over the emergency tariffs the Supreme Court struck down in February 2026, joining the importers seeking refunds; the court stayed it under its IEEPA procedure.0.65Former Store Worker Sues Vuori Over Overtime Pay on Commissions
Robert F. Peckham United States Courthouse and Federal Building, 280, South 1st Street, Downtown Historic District, Japantown, San Jose, Santa Clara County, California, 95113, United States
CONFIRMED89% CONFIDENCE3.5 years agoThe complaint's header reads 'Case 5:23-cv-01121-NC Document 1 Filed 03/14/23'.[1]Former employee Terrence Buchanan filed a class and collective action claiming Vuori left commissions and bonuses out of overtime pay for hourly retail staff, breaching federal and California wage law.0.64Salesforce AI Copyright Suit Returns to Judge Breyer for a Case Conference
Phillip Burton Federal Building & United States Courthouse, 450, Golden Gate Avenue, Civic Center, San Francisco, California, 94102, United StatesSalesforce
SCHEDULED79% CONFIDENCEin 57 daysJudge Breyer's scheduling order (docket 45): 'Case Management Conference set for 11/20/2026 at 8:30 AM in San Francisco - Videoconference Only.'[1]Judge Charles Breyer holds a case management conference in the authors' class action over Salesforce's xGen training data, with fact discovery due to close in July 2027.0.63Oracle E-Business Suite Breach Suits Consolidated in Austin
United States Courthouse, 501, West 5th Street, Warehouse District, Austin, Travis County, Texas, 78701, United StatesOracle
CONFIRMED86% CONFIDENCE262 days agoThe order in No. 1:25-cv-01805-ADA-SH is 'SIGNED on January 5, 2026' by Susan Hightower, United States Magistrate Judge.[1]A federal magistrate judge combined 33 class actions over the Cl0p theft of Oracle E-Business Suite data into In re Oracle Corporation Data Breach Litigation.0.62Authors Sue Salesforce Over Pirated Books Used to Train Its xGen AI
Phillip Burton Federal Building & United States Courthouse, 450, Golden Gate Avenue, Civic Center, San Francisco, California, 94102, United StatesSalesforce
CONFIRMED88% CONFIDENCE344 days agoReuters (16 October 2025) says the novelists sued 'in the complaint filed on Wednesday'; the complaint is stamped 'Filed 10/15/25'.[1]Novelists Molly Tanzer and Jennifer Gilmore filed a proposed class action saying Salesforce trained its xGen language models on the Books3 trove of pirated books.0.62Oracle Shareholders File Securities Fraud Class Action in Delaware
J. Caleb Boggs Federal Building, 844, North King Street, Downtown, Wilmington, New Castle County, Delaware, 19801, United States
CONFIRMED89% CONFIDENCE233 days agoThe complaint in Case 1:26-cv-00127 is stamped 'Filed 02/03/26'; Kessler Topaz's notice says the action 'was filed on February 3, 2026, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware'.[1]Barrows v. Oracle says Oracle misled investors that its AI data-center spending for OpenAI would quickly turn into revenue, covering stock bought June-December 2025.0.61Wilmar Legal Head Jailed Six Years for Bribing Judges
CONFIRMED89% CONFIDENCE205 days agoWilmar's announcement dated 3 March 2026: the Central Jakarta District Court 'has sentenced Muhammad Syafei ... today to six (6) years of imprisonment'.[1]The Jakarta anti-corruption court sentenced Muhammad Syafei, head of social security legal at Wilmar's Indonesian unit, to six years for helping channel about Rp 60 billion (US$4 million) in bribes to the judges who acquitted Wilmar.0.61Dutch Supreme Court Sends Privacy Class Action Against Oracle Back to Appeal
Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, 8, Korte Voorhout, Museumkwartier, Centrum, Den Haag, Zuid-Holland, Nederland, 2511 EK, Nederland
CONFIRMED89% CONFIDENCE69 days agoECLI:NL:HR:2026:1198, Hoge Raad, 17-07-2026: the judgment was 'in het openbaar uitgesproken ... op 17 juli 2026'; Oracle's 10-Q: 'on July 17, 2026, the Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeal had applied the wrong standard'.[1]The Hoge Raad quashed the Amsterdam appeal court's admission of The Privacy Collective's GDPR mass claim over Oracle's and Salesforce's ad-tech and sent it to the Hague Court of Appeal.0.60Google and DOJ Due to File a Joint Proposed Final Judgment in Ad Tech Case
Albert V. Bryan United States Courthouse, 401 Courthouse Square, Alexandria, VA 22314, United StatesGoogle
SCHEDULED86% CONFIDENCEin 8 daysThe court's 2 September 2026 order (ECF 1857) directs the parties to "file one jointly proposed Final Judgment" "within 30 days of the date of this Order", which falls on 2 October 2026, and AdExchanger[1] reports "Both parties have until October 2 to submit their proposed final judgments".Google and the Justice Department must file one jointly proposed Final Judgment in the ad tech antitrust case by 2 October 2026, writing Judge Brinkema's behavioral remedies into an order that takes effect 60 days after she enters it.0.60Judge Approves the DOJ's HPE-Juniper Settlement Over States' Objections
Robert F. Peckham United States Courthouse and Federal Building, 280 South 1st Street, San Jose, California 95113, United States
CONFIRMED85% CONFIDENCE43 days agoThe order granting the motion for entry of final judgment (Case 5:25-cv-00951-PCP, Document 482) is 'Filed 08/12/26' and signed 'Dated: August 12, 2026' by P. Casey Pitts; no time is given, so it is an all-day date.[1]Judge P. Casey Pitts entered the consent decree clearing HPE's Juniper Networks deal in a 41-page order that found DOJ leadership overrode its own antitrust staff, but held that 12 states and DC had not shown the Instant On sale and Mist source-code licence were against the public interest.0.60
Wilmar International