Cases 1 - 10 of 47
Rodrigues v. O'Malley
as 3:2023cv06385
Plaintiff:
Servante Rodrigues
Defendant:
Kilolo Kijakazi, SSA (INTERESTED PARTY / NEF) and Martin J. O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Pierre et al v. Apple Inc.
as 3:2023cv05981
Plaintiff:
Lamartine Pierre, Mark Whitlock, Lynn-Marie Rodrigues and others
Defendant:
Apple Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
Rodrigues et al v. General Motors LLC
as 3:2023cv04488
Plaintiff:
Annette Rodrigues and Charles Smith
Defendant:
General Motors LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Armstrong v. Rentals et al
as 3:2023cv04707
Plaintiff:
Clyde Armstrong
Defendant:
Mark Rentals, Predo Rodrigous, Carline Rodrigous and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv04657
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Rodrigues Troncao, Jr. v. Kijakazi
as 5:2023cv03467
Plaintiff:
Domingos Rodrigues Troncao, Jr.
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Secuity and Kilolo Kijakazi
Interested Party:
SSA (INTERESTED PARTY / NEF)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Tarlecky v. Embark Technology, Inc. et al
as 3:2023cv03211
Plaintiff:
Karen Tarlecky
Defendant:
Embark Technology, Inc., Elaine Chao, Patricia Chiodo and others
Daro v. Embark Technology, Inc. et al
as 4:2023cv03246
Plaintiff:
Andy Daro
Defendant:
Embark Technology, Inc., Elaine Chao, Patricia Chiodo and others
Tron v. Robertson et al
as 3:2022cv08634
Plaintiff:
Sergio Tron
Defendant:
Ian Robertson, Ken Manget, Alex Rodrigues and others
Manning v. Embark Technology Inc. et al
as 3:2022cv07526
Plaintiff:
Mr Robert Manning, II and Robert Manning, II
Defendant:
Embark Technology Inc., Ian Robertson, Ken Manget and others
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.
