Cases 1 - 10 of 45
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, et al v. Gina Raimondo, et al
as 22-5267
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Matt Campbell, Diana Hetzel and others
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Barbara Krukowski-Rastelli and William Prevatel, AIA
Defendant / Appellee:
Gina Raimondo, in her official capacity as Secretary of Commerce, James Olthoff, Dr.; in his official capacity as Director of the National Institute for Standards and Technology, National Institute of Standards and Technology and others
ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH et al v. RAIMONDO et al
as 1:2021cv02365
Plaintiff:
ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH, ROBERT MCILVAINE, MATT CAMPBELL and others
Defendant:
Secretary GINA M. RAIMONDO, Dr. JAMES OLTHOFF, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Daniel Milligan, et al v. Antony Blinken, et al
as 21-5017
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Daniel Burkhard, Patrick Ryan Damian, Sohail Akbani and others
Defendant / Appellant:
United States Department of Homeland Security, Monty Wilkinson, Acting U.S. Attorney General, Antony Blinken and others
Joshua Atchley, et al v. Astrazeneca UK Limited, et al
as 20-7077
Defendant / Appellee:
Astrazeneca UK Limited, GE Healthcare USA Holding LLC, Pharmacia & Upjohn Company LLC and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Victoria Capra, Billy Johnson, Leasa Dollar and others
Kevin Mccarthy, et al v. Nancy Pelosi, et al
as 20-5240
Defendant / Appellee:
Nancy Pelosi, The Honorable, in her official capacity as Speaker of the House of Representatives and Member of the United States House of Representatives for the California 12th Congressional District, Cheryl L. Johnson, The Honorable, in her official capacity as Clerk of the United States House of Representatives and Paul D. Irving, in his official capacity as Sergeant-at-Arms of the United States House of Representatives
Plaintiff / Appellant:
David S. Schweikert, The Honorable, in his official capacity as Member of the United States House of Representatives for the Arizona 6th Congressional District, Kevin Owen Mccarthy, The Honorable, in his official capacity as House Minority Leader and Member of the United States House of Representatives for the California 23rd Congressional District, James Shipley Swayze and others
Amicus Curiae:
Individual Rights Foundation, Reason Foundation and Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence
CAMPBELL v. SCHMIDT et al
as 1:2020cv01785
Defendant:
EMILY W. MURPHY, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, WILLIAM S. SCHMIDT and others
Plaintiff:
JOCELYN DIONNE CAMPBELL
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551
Hugh McKinney v. Ryan McCarthy
as 20-5189
Defendant / Appellee:
Ryan D. McCarthy, in his official capacity as Secretary of the United States Army
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Hugh Campbell McKinney
Willie Kennedy, et al v. Sonny Perdue, et al
as 20-5107
Defendant / Appellee:
Charles Herd, High Plains Farm Credit - Kansas, State of Louisiana and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Corey Lea, The Cowtown Foundation Inc. and Willie Charles Kennedy
CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY et al v. BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY et al
as 1:2020cv00381
Defendant:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY and others
Plaintiff:
CAMPBELL FOODSERVICE COMPANY, JOSEPH CAMPBELL COMPANY, CAMPBELL COMPANY OF CANADA and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
RAIL FREIGHT FUEL SURCHARGE ANTITRUST LITIGATION (NO. II)- MDL NO. 2925
as 1:2020mc00008
Plaintiff:
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY, NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY LLC, AK STEEL CORPORATION and others
Defendant:
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY and others
In Re:
RAIL FREIGHT FUEL SURCHARGE ANTITRUST LITIGATION (NO. II)- MDL NO. 2925
Interested Party:
NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION, UNION PACIFIC CORPORATION, CVR ENERGY, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15 Antitrust Litigation
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.
