Cases 31 - 40 of 48
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv01181
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2009cv00534
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
GONZALEZ v. DEPARTMENT OF S.I.S. et al
as 3:2008cv00291
Plaintiff:
JUAN A. GONZALEZ
Defendant:
DEPARTMENT OF S.I.S. and WARDEN ZINK
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
RENDON et al v. RAGANS et al
as 2:2008cv01665
Plaintiff:
JUAN RENDON, TAYLOR HEININGER and JESUS GONZALEZ
Defendant:
MICHAEL RAGANS, CARLOS DEOLIVEIRA and WENDY DEOLIVEIRA
Cause Of Action: Diversity
LU v. CHERTOFF et al
as 2:2008cv00097
Plaintiff:
GANWEI LU
Defendant:
MICHAEL CHERTOFF, EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, EVELYN UPCHURCH and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
RICHES v. DYKSTRA et al
as 2:2007cv01740
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN LEE RICHES
Defendant:
LENNY DYKSTRA, GARY SHEFFIELD, DAVID JUSTICE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
GONZALEZ v. PAROLE SUPERVISOR
as 3:2007cv00275
Petitioner:
JOSE MANUEL GONZALEZ
Respondent:
PAROLE SUPERVISOR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WANG v. CHERTOFF et al
as 2:2007cv01359
Plaintiff:
LIN WANG
Defendant:
MICHAEL CHERTOFF, EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, EVELYN UPCHURCH and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
AL-MAZIADAWI v. GONZALES et al
as 1:2007cv00238
Plaintiff:
HUSSEIN F. AL-MAZIADAWI
Defendant:
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, MICHAEL CHERTOFF, EMILIO GONZALEZ and others
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing
KOVALENKO v. GONZALEZ et al
as 2:2007cv01153
Plaintiff:
OLENA KOVALENKO
Defendant:
EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, MICHAEL CHERTOFF, ROBERT S. MUELLER, III and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
