Hoeg et al v. Newsom et al
| Tracy Hoeg, Ram Duriseti, Aaron Kheriaty, Pete Mazolewski and Azadeh Khatibi |
| Gavin Newsom, Kristina Lawson, Randy Hawkins, Laurie Rose Lubiano, Michelle Anne Bholat, David E. Ryu, Ryan Brooks, James M. Healzer, Asif Mahmood, Nicole A. Jeong, Richard E. Thorp, Veling Tsai and Eserick Watkins |
| 2:2022at01119 |
| November 1, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 1, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by Ram Duriseti, Tracy Hoeg, Azadeh Khatibi, Aaron Kheriaty, Pete Mazolewski for attorney Jenin Younes to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 225, receipt number ACAEDC-10526970) (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Good Standing)(Powell, Laura) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF against All Defendants by Ram Duriseti, Tracy Hoeg, Aaron Kheriaty, Pete Mazolewski, Azadeh Khatibi. Attorney Powell, Laura B. added. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-10526967) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C, #5 Exhibit D, #6 Exhibit E, #7 Exhibit F, #8 Exhibit G, #9 Exhibit H, #10 Exhibit I, #11 Exhibit J)(Powell, Laura) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
