Cases 31 - 40 of 8,098
Schuman, et al. v. Microchip Technology Incorporated, et al.
as 24-2978
Plaintiff:
PETER SCHUMAN and WILLIAM COPLIN
Defendant:
MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INCORPORATED, ATMEL CORPORATION and ATMEL CORPORATION UNITED STATES SEVERANCE GUARANTEE BENEFIT PROGRAM
Yue Wang v. Monterey Park Police Park Department et al
as 2:2024cv02358
Plaintiff:
Yue Wang
Defendant:
City of Monterey Park, Connor Crabtree and Peter Palomino
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Civil Rights Act
Billy Gitau v. Dustin Fay et al
as 8:2024cv00977
Plaintiff:
Billy Gitau
Defendant:
Dustin Fay, Monte Peters, Martha Perez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Coleman, et al. v. Newsom, et al.
as 24-2938
Plaintiff:
RALPH COLEMAN, JORGE ANDRADE RICO, PETER COCKCROFT and others
Defendant:
GAVIN NEWSOM, JEFF MACOMBER, JOE STEPHENSHAW and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2024cv02016
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Alexander v. Springer et al
as 3:2024cv02139
Plaintiff:
Carrie Alexander
Defendant:
Daniel D. Springer, Enrique Salem, Peter Solvik and others
(PC) Ellis v. El Dorado County Probation Dept.
as 2:2024cv01302
Plaintiff:
Peter Ellis
Defendant:
El Dorado County Probation Department and El Dorado County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
(HC)Ramirez v. Scholyer
as 1:2024cv00323
Petitioner:
Peter Torres Ramirez
Respondent:
Charles Scholyer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Telford v. AT&T, INC.
as 3:2024cv00798
Plaintiff:
Peter Telford
Defendant:
AT&T, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 bc Diversity-Breach of Contract
Gantt et al v. TMLF Hawaii LLC et al
as 1:2024cv00116
Plaintiff:
Paul Gantt and Edna Gantt
Defendant:
TMLF Hawaii LLC and Peter Stone
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Foreclosure
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.
