Cases 11 - 20 of 1,282
Alexander v. Diaz, et al.
as 24-2942
Plaintiff:
ANAND JON ALEXANDER
Defendant:
RALPH DIAZ, Secretary of CDCR, MARCUS POLLARD, Warden, Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility, DANIEL PARAMO, former Warden, Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility and others
Ibarra Diaz, et al. v. Miller, et al.
as 24-2660
Plaintiff:
MARTHA IBARRA DIAZ and STEPHANIE MICHELLE LARA IBARRA
Defendant:
LOREN K. MILLER, ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, UR M. JADDOU and others
Diaz-Godinez, et al. v. Miller, et al.
as 24-2641
Plaintiff:
ALEXANDER DIAZ-GODINEZ and RITA GODINEZ ALVAREZ
Defendant:
LOREN K. MILLER, ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, UR M. JADDOU and others
Bernardino v. Diaz, et al.
as 24-2536
Plaintiff:
CLAUDIO BERNARDINO, JR.
Defendant:
Secretary of CDCR RALPH DIAZ, Warden TAMMY FOSS, THOMAS, (Captain) and others
Jimenez-Guzman, et al. v. Garland
as 24-2534
Petitioner:
MARTHA ELIZABETH JIMENEZ-GUZMAN and SAMUEL ANDRES DIAZ-JIMENEZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Diaz v. Moore, et al.
as 24-2512
Plaintiff:
D. DIAZ
Defendant:
MICHEL REY MOORE, RICHARD ALARCON, RICHARD ALATORRE and others
Rivera Orellana, et al. v. Garland
as 24-1747
Petitioner:
ANGEL MAURICIO RIVERA ORELLANA, HELEN YAMILETH CEBILLA DIAZ and MAURICIO ALEXANDER RIVERA CEBILLA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Diaz-Orosco v. Garland
as 24-1627
Petitioner:
JULIO ALFONSO DIAZ-OROSCO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Romero Calderon, et al. v. Garland
as 24-1578
Petitioner:
FRANCIS PAMELA ROMERO CALDERON, AARO ENRIQUE DIAZ ROMERO and VALERY SOFIA DIAZ ROMERO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Hill v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento
as 24-1583
Petitioner:
NATHAN HILL
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
Interested Party:
GAVIN NEWSOM, RALPH DIAZ, Director of CDCR, KEN CLARK, Warden of CSP-Corcoran and others
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.
