Cases 41 - 50 of 74,055
USA v. Juan Montas
as 24-1851
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
JUAN MONTAS, also known as Juan Miguel Montas also knowns as Juan Montas Hilario also known as Juan Hilario
Juan Argueta-Portillo v. Attorney General United States of America
as 24-1886
Petitioner:
JUAN ALEXANDER ARGUETA-PORTILLO
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Board of Trustees, Plumbers and Pipefitters Local Union No. 74 Pension Fund et al v. Summit Mechanical, Inc.
as 1:2024cv00558
Plaintiff:
Board of Trustees, Plumbers and Pipefitters Local Union No. 74 Pension Fund, Board of Trustees, Plumbers and Pipefitters Local Union No. 74 Annuity Fund, Board of trustess, Plumbers and Pipefitters Local Union No. 74 Welfare Fund and others
Defendant:
Summit Mechanical, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1145 E.R.I.S.A.
Ibrahim Ibrahim v. Attorney General United States of America
as 24-1875
Petitioner:
IBRAHIM NASR IBRAHIM
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
INGRAM v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
as 2:2024cv02029
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA INGRAM
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Consol Mining Co LLC, et al v. United States Department of Labor, et al
as 24-1873
Petitioner:
CONSOL MINING CO LLC and CONSOL ENERGY INC, c/o Sedgwick CMS
Respondent:
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR and VONDA SILK, surviving spouse of Stanley D. Silk, deceased
GEICO v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE et al
as 2:2024cv05929
Plaintiff:
GEICO a/s/o Raquel Vizcainobarroso
Defendant:
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE and Carlos Mazza
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Tort Claim
Yasinov v. United States et al
as 2:2024cv01939
Plaintiff:
Igor Yasinov
Defendant:
UNITED STATES, BRYANT, DR. JOHNSON and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
