Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Hernandez-Renoj, et al. v. Garland
as 23-3412
Petitioner:
NELIDA ISABEL HERNANDEZ-RENOJ, DANA ELURIA RENOJ-HERNANDEZ and JHORDY FRANCISCO RENOJ-HERNANDEZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Hernandez Cox, et al. v. Garland
as 22-1933
Petitioner:
ANASTACIO WILMAR HERNANDEZ COX, DOMINGA EULOGIA HERNANDEZ BAC and IRLANDA ISABEL HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Innovative Sports Management, Inc. V. Mauricio Ariel Vincenzi Sr. et al
as 2:2022cv06238
Defendant:
Innovative Sports Management, Inc. d/b/a Integrated Sports Media, Mauricio Ariel Vincenzi, Sr. Individually and d/b/a Bodegon No. 69, Sandra Isabel Hernandez Individually and d/b/a Bodegon No. 69 and others
Plaintiff:
Innovative Sports Management, Inc. doing business as Integrated Sports Media
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 521 Violations of Cable Communications Act of 1984
Redevelopment Agency v. Jaime Alvarez, et al
as 5:2002cv00142
Defendant:
Martin Agurrie, Antonio Alarcon, Juan Alcaraz and others
Counter Claimant:
Raul Aldaz, Jesus Arteaga, Tasha Jones and others
Cross Defendant:
Teresa Bernal, Juan Gomez and Diana Ramirez
Cross Claimant:
Jason Bosch
Unknown:
Rosalyn M Chapman, Dep In Chg E Div, Gustavo Azgad Zarate and others
Counter Defendant:
City of San Bernardino, -, City of San Bernardino, -, Redevelopment Agency of The City of San Bernardino and others
Plaintiff:
Redevelopment Agency of The City of San Bernardino
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Elena Hernandez Hernandez, et al v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 12-70653
Petitioner:
ELENA ISABEL HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ, ELENA ISABEL HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ, BEATRIZ HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ and others
Respondent:
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General
Maria Hernandez Angeles v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 10-72987
Petitioner:
MARIA ISABEL HERNANDEZ ANGELES
Respondent:
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General
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.
