Cases 11 - 20 of 740
George Austin v. USPS
as 21-17021
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GEORGE JARVIS AUSTIN, Esq.
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
Timothy Petrozzi v. Jay Inslee, et al
as 21-35882
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIMOTHY R. PETROZZI
Defendant / Appellee:
JAY ROBERT INSLEE, Governor, BOB FERGUSON, RONALD B. LEIGHTON, Judge and others
Crystal Nasha Rodgers v. Louis DeJoy et al
as 2:2021cv08190
Plaintiff:
Crystal Nasha Rodgers
Defendant:
Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General and United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Mohamed Abdelkadir v. USPS, et al
as 21-35843
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MOHAMED ABDELKADIR
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, C.J. MARLEY, Tort Claims Supervisor and TERRELL T. CARRINGTON
Arturo Valencia Barrera v. USPS
as 21-56019
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ARTURO OSIEL VALENCIA BARRERA
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
Advantage Mailing, Inc. v. United States Postal Service
as 8:2021cv00972
Plaintiff:
Advantage Mailing, Inc.
Defendant:
United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Timothy Petrozzi v. Jay Inslee, et al
as 21-35403
Defendant / Appellee:
PAEZ, Honorable, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, STANLEY J. RUMBAUGH and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIMOTHY R. PETROZZI
Austin v. United States Postal Service
as 4:2021cv03108
Plaintiff:
George Jarvis Austin
Defendant:
United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1396
Helen Le v. USPS, et al
as 21-15533
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, CEO, Director, Supervisor and SCOTT S. HARRIS, Clerk at Supreme Court of US
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HELEN LE
Ahmad Aljindi v. USA, et al
as 21-55166
Defendant / Appellee:
CHAD F. WOLF, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security, PAUL M. NAKASONE, Department of Defense, National Security Agency, WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
AHMAD JAMALEDDIN ALJINDI
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.
