Cases 41 - 50 of 230
USA v. Edgar Flores
as 21-5290
Defendant / Appellant:
EDGAR LERMA FLORES, aka Carlos Alberto Pencelas Rodriguez, aka Carlos Alberto Penuelas Rodriguez
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Enrique Perez-Rodriguez v. Merrick Garland
as 21-3285
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Petitioner:
ENRIQUE PEREZ-RODRIGUEZ
Pricilia Rodriguez-Trillo v. Robert Wilkinson
as 21-3176
Respondent:
ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting U.S. Attorney General
Petitioner:
PRICILIA RODRIGUEZ-TRILLO
Jose Rodriguez-Villeda v. Robert Wilkinson
as 21-3141
Petitioner:
JOSE ANTONIO RODRIGUEZ-VILLEDA
Respondent:
ROBERT M. WILKINSON, Acting U.S. Attorney General
Janet Malam, et al v. Rebecca Adducci, et al
as 21-1146
Plaintiff / Appellee:
GUSTAVO SOTO VARGAS, LENCHE KRCOSKA, QAID ALHALMI and others
Respondent:
CHAD F. WOLF, Secretary, MATTHEW T. ALBENCE, ICE Deputy Director, ICE/DHS and others
Petitioner:
JANET MALAM
Maria Bonilla-Molina, et al v. Jeffrey Rosen
as 21-3052
Petitioner:
JAVIER RODRIGUEZ-BONILLA, JAIME RODRIDUEZ-BONILLA and MARIA DAISEY BONILLA-MOLINA
Respondent:
JEFFREY A. ROSEN, Acting U.S. Attorney General
Kathryn Rodriguez v. Hirshberg Acceptance Corp
as 20-2247
Defendant / Appellee:
HIRSHBERG ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KATHRYN RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons
Kathryn Rodriguez v. Hirshberg Acceptance Corp, et al
as 20-2253
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KATHRYN RODRIGUEZ
Defendant / Appellee:
MODERN FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP. and HIRSHBERG ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
Kathryn Rodriguez v. Hirshberg Acceptance Corp
as 20-2184
Defendant / Appellee:
HIRSHBERG ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KATHRYN RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons
Mario RodriguezIn re: Mario Rodriguez
as 20-2163
Petitioner:
In re: MARIO HUERTA RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
NOAH NAGY, Warden, Warden
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.
