Cases 11 - 20 of 42
Inez Tarver v. National Railroad Passenger Co, et al
as 19-55647
Defendant / Appellee:
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION, DBA Amtrak, PAMELA KEYES, JORGE RODRIGUEZ and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
INEZ SUNTA TARVER
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 18-16097
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Objector - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Abdul Mohamed, et al v. Uber Technologies, Inc.
as 18-16097
Appellant:
STEVEN SIDLER, DANIEL TURNER, HAROLD BROWER and others
Plaintiff / Appellee:
SHANNON WISE, RONALD GILLETTE, BRANDON FARMER and others
Defendant / Appellee:
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Inez Sunta Tarver v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation
as 2:2017cv04381
Defendant:
Rudolph Haynes, Pamela Keyes, National Railroad Passenger Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Inez Sunta Tarver
Jorge Rodriguez Rea v. Jefferson Session
as 17-70229
Petitioner:
JORGE RODRIGUEZ REA
Respondent:
SALLY Q. YATES, Acting Attorney General
Service Employees International Union v. Sal Roselli et al
as 2:2016cv05219
Defendant:
John Borsos, Gail Buhler, Ralph Cornejo and others
Plaintiff:
Service Employees International Union
Jorge Rodriguez-Zamora v. Carolyn W. Colvin
as 5:2016cv01213
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Plaintiff:
Jorge Rodriguez-Zamora
Service Employees International Union v. Sal Roselli et al
as 2:2016mc00017
Defendant:
John Borsos, Gail Buhler, Ralph Cornejo and others
Plaintiff:
Service Employees International Union
Mark Brooks v. City of Los Angeles Police Department et al
as 2:2015cv06331
Plaintiff:
Mark Brooks
Defendant:
City of Los Angeles Police Department, Jorge Rodriguez, Gil Curtis and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv00016
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
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.
