- Search with
- Parallel SearchEnter a full sentence between 5 and 30 words to find cases with conceptually similar sentences
- or
- Keyword SearchEnter keyword terms, accompanied by optional Boolean connectors
- ANDfraud AND damagesBoth terms in document
- ORcar OR automobileEither term in document
- NOTinfringement NOT patentTerm must not appear in document
- """due diligence"Exact match
- ()appeal AND (verdict OR judgment)Grouping terms
- *withdr*wSingle letter wildcard (withdraw, withdrew)
- !infring!Root expander (infringe, infringed, infringing)
- /ninvestor /5 diligenceTerms within n words of each other
- /sfees /s reasonableTerms within same sentence
- /padmissible /p warrantTerms within the same paragraph
Quad Int'l, Inc. v. Doe
CASE NO. 1:12-cv-02050-AWI-SKO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2013)2 Citing cases
Perkins v. Credit One Bank
Case No.: 2:20-cv-01524-KJD-NJK (D. Nev. Oct. 30, 2020)At any rate, the Court notes that such an order is properly issued only where a showing is made that the Court likely has jurisdiction over the unknown defendants. E.g., Lik v. Doe, 2020 WL 1984291, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 27, 2020) (collecting cases); Quad Int'l, Inc. v. Doe, 2013 WL 178141, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2013). Plaintiff has not sufficiently shown that this Court would have personal jurisdiction over the Doe Defendants in this case.
Tucker v. Credit One Bank
Case No.: 2:20-cv-01146-GMN-NJK (D. Nev. Oct. 27, 2020) Cited 1 timesAt any rate, the Court notes that such an order is properly issued only where a showing is made that the Court likely has jurisdiction over the unknown defendants. E.g., Lik v. Doe, 2020 WL 1984291, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 27, 2020) (collecting cases); Quad Int'l, Inc. v. Doe, 2013 WL 178141, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2013). Plaintiff has not sufficiently shown that this Court would have personal jurisdiction over the Doe Defendants in this case.