Cases 21 - 30 of 326
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv03030
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1837
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
In Re: Hatim Yusuf
as 23-1989
Petitioner:
HATIM YAHYA YUSUF
Respondent:
SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DIRECTOR FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1458
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-1577
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant / Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
BARAGADA v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES et al
as 3:2023cv01442
Plaintiff:
KRISHNA PAVAN RAJA BARAGADA
Defendant:
UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UR MENDOZA JADDOU, ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
TELAPROLU v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES et al
as 2:2023cv00665
Plaintiff:
VENKATA SUBBA RAO TELAPROLU
Defendant:
UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, UR MENDOZA JADDOU, ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Anthony Testa v. Doe Potato, et al
as 22-3246
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ANTHONY J. TESTA, Executor
Defendant / Appellee:
DOE POTATO, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00008
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv06273
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
