Cases 51 - 60 of 217
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012at00802
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
McElhone v. Sebelius
as 3:2012cv06090
Plaintiff:
Theodore Patrick McElhone
Defendant:
Kathleen Sebelius
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Jim Navarro v. USA, et al
as 12-17586
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JIM NAVARRO
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ERIK K. SHINSEKI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Secretary of Social Security Administration and others
Theodore McElhone v. Kathleen Sebeliu
as 12-73409
Petitioner:
THEODORE MCELHONE
Respondent:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services
San Joaquin Community Hospital v. Sebelius
as 1:2012cv01642
Plaintiff:
San Joaquin Community Hospital
Defendant:
Kathleen Sebelius
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
San Joaquin Community Hospital v. Sebelius
as 1:2012at00647
Plaintiff:
San Joaquin Community Hospital
Defendant:
Kathleen Sebelius
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551
PAMC, LTD. v. Kathleen Sebeliu
as 12-56652
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PAMC, LTD., a California Limited Partnership, DBA Pacific Alliance Medical Center
Defendant - Appellee:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Secretary of the United Staes Department of Health and Human Services
Multicare Health System v. Sebelius
as 3:2012cv05756
Plaintiff:
Multicare Health System
Defendant:
Kathleen Sebelius
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1395
Navarro v. United States of America et al
as 2:2012cv01803
Plaintiff:
Jim Navarro
Defendant:
United States of America, Eric Ken Shinseki, Michael J Astrue and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Cornerstone Prosthetics and Orthotics, LLC v. Sebelius
as 2:2012cv01424
Defendant:
Kathleen Sebelius
Plaintiff:
Cornerstone Prosthetics and Orthotics LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1395
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.
