Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
June 03, 2021
In Re: Google Play Store Simulated Casino-Style Games Litigation
Case Number:
5:21-md-03001
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Multi-district Litigation, Class Action
Judge:
Firms
- Baker McKenzie
- Bursor & Fisher
- Cooley LLP
- Davis & Norris
- Dovel & Luner
- Edelson PC
- Forman Watkins
- Hillis Clark
- Kennedy Kennedy & Ives
- Kopelowitz Ostrow
- Manning Law Firm
- Morgan Lewis
- Orrick Herrington
- Paul Hastings
- Pearson Warshaw
- Schneider Wallace
- Schneider Wallace Cottrell Konecky LLP
- Tousley Brain
- Tycko & Zavareei
- Weldy Law Firm
- Woodrow & Peluso
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
View recent docket activity
Reflects complaints, answers, motions, orders and trial notes entered from Jan. 1, 2011.
Additional or older documents may be available in Pacer.
Coverage
-
April 08, 2024
9th Circ. Doubts Quick Section 230 Appeal In Casino App Suits
A Ninth Circuit panel appeared skeptical Monday of weighing in on whether the Communications Decency Act's Section 230 shields Google, Apple and Meta from consolidated multidistrict litigation over allegedly illicit "social casino" game apps on their platforms, with two judges saying that the interlocutory appeal is "premature" and "confusing."
Parties
Stay ahead of the curve
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
- Direct access to case information and documents.
- All significant new filings across U.S. federal district courts, updated hourly on business days.
- Full-text searches on all patent complaints in federal courts.
- No-fee downloads of the complaints and so much more!
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login