Cases 41 - 50 of 169
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv02874
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Chowdhury v. Veon Ltd. et al
as 1:2021cv03527
Plaintiff:
NAYEEM A CHOWDHURY and Nayeem A. Chowdhury
Defendant:
Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC) and VEON LTD.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 nr
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01980
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Hossain-Chowdhury v. Garland
as 21-6218
Petitioner:
MIR HOSSAIN-CHOWDHURY
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Orozco v. CWS Amsterdam Ave, Inc et al
as 7:2021cv01902
Plaintiff:
Jonatan Cardenas Orozco and Jonathan Cardenas Orozco
Defendant:
CWS Yonkers, Inc., CWS Yonkers 2, Inc., Tony De Desisso and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Chowdhury et al v. The City of New York et al
as 1:2021cv00962
Defendant:
DERMOT SHEA, KERRY PLAWIAK, CITY OFNEW YORK and others
Plaintiff:
Shaiful Chowdhury and JOHN 1-20 DOES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Tapia et al v. Haat Bazaar Inc. et al
as 1:2021cv00539
Plaintiff:
Pascual Cegueda Ramirez, Juan and Manuel Tapia
Defendant:
Monsur Chowdhury, Pitubai Doe, Vadobai Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv00164
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Koh v. Proteostasis Therapeutics, Inc. et al
as 1:2020cv10296
Plaintiff:
Chan-Hee Koh
Defendant:
Proteostasis Therapeutics, Inc., Emmanuel Dulac, Meenu Chhabra and others
Merritt v. Proteostasis Therapeutics, Inc. et al
as 1:2020cv10275
Defendant:
Emmanuel Dulac, Proteostasis Therapeutics, Inc., Meenu Chhabra and others
Plaintiff:
Scott Merritt
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.
