Cases 21 - 27 of 27
First Amendment Coalition v. U.S. Department of Justice
as 4:2012cv01013
Plaintiff:
First Amendment Coalition
Defendant:
U.S. Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division
as 5:2011cv05105
Plaintiff:
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
Defendant:
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Stimac v. Russoniello et al
as 3:2010cv02216
Plaintiff:
Philip L. Stimac
Defendant:
Joseph Russoniello and U.S. Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Osterman v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services et al
as 3:2010cv00035
Plaintiff:
Bruce S. Osterman
Defendant:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Executive Office for Immigration Review and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Berstein, LLP v. U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division
as 3:2010cv00013
Plaintiff:
Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Berstein, LLP, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Berstein, LLP, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Berstein, LLP and others
Defendant:
U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
Ha v. Burr et al
as 4:2007cv04699
Plaintiff:
Hung Ha
Defendant:
Kenneth Mark Burr, Marie Mayupao, Thomas Orloff and others
Respondent:
Superior Court of California County of Alameda, U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ha v. Burr et al
as 3:2007cv04699
Plaintiff:
Hung Ha
Defendant:
Kenneth Mark Burr, Marie Mayupao, Thomas Orloff and others
Respondent:
Superior Court of California County of Alameda, U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
