Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Criminal Justice Reform Clinic v. FCC
as 26-1012
Petitioner:
Criminal Justice Reform Clinic
Respondent:
Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
Intervenor:
Securus Technologies, LLC
Network Communications International Corporation v. FCC, et al
as 26-1003
Petitioner:
Network Communications International Corporation
Respondent:
Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
Intervenor:
Securus Technologies, LLC, Direct Action for Rights and Equality, Inc., Pennsylvania Prison Society and others
United Church of Christ Media Justice Ministry v. FCC, et al
as 25-1280
Respondent:
Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
Petitioner:
United Church of Christ Media Justice Ministry, Inc.
Intervenor:
Direct Action for Rights and Equality, Inc., Global Tel*Link Corporation, National Sheriffs' Association and others
ANTOON v. SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
as 1:2017mc01892
Plaintiff:
PATRICK ANTOON, JR.
Defendant:
SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Cause Of Action: Motion to Quash Subpoenas
Securus Technologies, Inc. v. FCC, et al
as 16-1321
Petitioner:
Securus Technologies, Inc.
Respondent:
Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
MOJICA v. SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
as 1:2016mc00345
Plaintiff:
SUSAN MOJICA
Defendant:
SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Cause Of Action: Motion to Quash Subpoenas
Securus Technologies, Inc. v. FCC, et al
as 15-1498
Petitioner:
Securus Technologies, Inc.
Respondent:
Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
MOJICA v. SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
as 1:2015mc01887
Plaintiff:
SUSAN MOJICA
Defendant:
SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Cause Of Action: Motion to Quash Subpoenas
Securus Technologies, Inc. v. FCC, et al
as 13-1280
Petitioner:
Securus Technologies, Inc.
Respondent:
Federal Communications Commission and United States of America
Movant-Intervenor:
Martha Wright, Dorothy Wade, Annette Wade and others
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.
