Cases 61 - 70 of 418
Isabel Ramos v. Merrick Garland
as 22-1761
Petitioner:
ISABEL ROCA RAMOS
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00552
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
FLORES-RAMOS v. ATRIUM HEALTH
as 1:2022cv00533
Plaintiff:
MIGUEL ANGEL FLORES-RAMOS
Defendant:
ATRIUM HEALTH
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
US v. Miguel Medrano-Ramos
as 22-4375
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
MIGUEL ANGEL MEDRANO-RAMOS, a/k/a Miguel A. Medrano-Ramos, a/k/a Miguel Medrano-Ramos, a/k/a Miguel Angel Ramos, a/k/a Miguel T. Medrano, a/k/a Miguel Hector Medrano, a/k/a Miguel Medrano
Virgin v. Ramos
as 5:2022hc02118
Petitioner:
Winerford Virgin
Respondent:
Warden R. Ramos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Andrews v. Ramos
as 5:2022hc02114
Petitioner:
Anthony Andrews
Respondent:
Warden R. Ramos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Riley v. Ramos
as 5:2022hc02112
Petitioner:
Michael A. Riley
Respondent:
Warden R. Ramos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Aluira et al v. W.G./Welch Mechanical Contractors, LLC
as 1:2022cv01510
Plaintiff:
Jose L Aluira, Ricardo Calderon, Manuel Carllo and others
Defendant:
W.G./Welch Mechanical Contractors, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv01502
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1446 Immigration: Petition for Naturalization Hearing
Creasman v. Ramos et al
as 5:2022hc02106
Petitioner:
David Clinton Creasman, II
Respondent:
Warden Ramos and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
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.
