D.C. Circuit Other Statutes Cases
Cases 61 - 70 of 11,500
WALKER v. 2100 2ND ST SW, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv00677
Plaintiff:
ANGELICA WALKER
Defendant:
2100 2nd ST SW, LLC and Thomas Wilbur
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
OSAGE NATION v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, et al
as 1:2024cv00679
Plaintiff:
OSAGE NATION
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR and DEB HAALAND
Cause Of Action: 25 U.S.C. § 640 Indian Tribal Rights
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. OFFICE DEPOT, INC.
as 1:2024mc00034
Petitioner:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Respondent:
OFFICE DEPOT, INC.
CASE NUMBER NOT USED
as 1:2024cv00664
Plaintiff:
MARONG LIU and NO PARTY
Defendant:
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, UR M. JADDOU and ALISSA L. EMMEL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
State of New York, et al v. Joseph Biden, Jr., et al
as 24-5047
Plaintiff:
State of New York, State of Hawaii, State of New Jersey and others
Defendant:
Joseph R. Biden, Jr., in his official capacity as the President of the United States, Louis DeJoy, in his official capacity as the Postmaster General of the United States and United States Postal Service
CASE NUMBER NOT USED
as 1:2024cv00620
Plaintiff:
MAHMOUD PAZOKI and NO PARTY
Not Yet Classified:
ANTONY BLINKEN, DOUGLASS BENNING, CHIP LAITINEN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
SHABAZZ v. D.C. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES VETERANS PROGRAM
as 1:2024cv00627
Plaintiff:
KWAME L. SHABAZZ
Defendant:
D.C. DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES VETERANS PROGRAM
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Inez Qtaish v. Steven Malman, et al
as 24-7029
Plaintiff:
Inez Qtaish
Defendant:
Steven J. Malman and Phillip L Radmer
LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC. v. ASUSTEK COMPUTER INC. et al
as 1:2024mc00031
Petitioner:
LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC.
Respondent:
ASUSTEK COMPUTER INC. and ASUS COMPUTER INTERNATIONAL
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
