Cases 61 - 70 of 102
Ivan Mendez v. Connected Wire Member
as 12-1946
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Ivan Mendez
Defendant - Appellee:
Connected Wire Members of a big international criminal organization
Mendez v. Connected Wired Members of a Big International Criminal Organization
as 4:2012cv00127
Plaintiff:
Ivan Mendez
Defendant:
Connected Wired Members
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mendez v. The United States of America et al
as 4:2012cv03055
Defendant:
Conected, Wired soldiers, One of the Conected Wired Members, The Conected Wired Member and others
Plaintiff:
Ivan L. Mendez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mendez v. United States of America et al
as 0:2012cv00028
Petitioner:
Raphael Mendez
Respondent:
United States of America , B. R. Jett , Marty Haugen and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Ivan Mendez v. Ms. Winny
as 11-3416
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Ivan Mendez
Defendant - Appellee:
Ms. Winny
Raphael Mendez v. James M. Rosenbaum, et al
as 11-2857
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Raphael Mendez
Defendant - Appellee:
James M. Rosenbaum, Federal Judge, U.S. Dist. Ct. Minn., Raymond L. Erickson, Federal Magistrate, U.S. Dist. Ct. Minn., Mary Haugen, Unit Manager, FMC Rochester, Minn. and others
Mendez v. Rosenbaum et al
as 0:2011cv01483
Plaintiff:
Raphael Mendez
Defendant:
James M. Rosenbaum, Raymond L. Erickson, Mary Haugen and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rodriguez-Mendez v. USA
as 4:2011cv03029
Petitioner:
Rodrigo Rodriguez-Mendez
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Raphael Mendez v. Judge James M. Rosenbaum, et al
as 11-1014
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Raphael Mendez
Defendant - Appellee:
Judge James M. Rosenbaum, Magistrate Judge Ray L. Erickson and FMC Rochester, Minnesota
Mendez v. Rosenbaum et al
as 0:2010cv04668
Plaintiff:
Raphael Mendez
Defendant:
James M. Rosenbaum, Raymond L. Erickson and FMC Rochester, Minn.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
