Cases 31 - 40 of 4,952
Williams v. Doe
as 7:2024cv00108
Plaintiff:
Jay Williams
Defendant:
John Doe 7:24-cv-108
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones
as 3:2024cv01951
Plaintiff:
Lindsay Jones
Defendant:
Xavier Becerra, in his official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, United States Department of Health and Human Services, Mandy Cohen, in her official capacity as Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Williams v. John Doe 7:24-cv-107-O
as 7:2024cv00107
Plaintiff:
Jay Williams
Defendant:
John Doe 7:24-cv-107-O
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Mitchell v. City of Burleson TX Municipality Inc et al
as 3:2024cv01894
Defendant:
B Cordell, Terres Poer, Autumn Keefer and others
Plaintiff:
Danny R Mitchell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv01898
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe
as 3:2024cv01871
Plaintiff:
Strike 3 Holdings LLC
Defendant:
John Doe
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe
as 3:2024cv01874
Defendant:
John Doe
Plaintiff:
Strike 3 Holdings LLC
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe
as 3:2024cv01872
Plaintiff:
Strike 3 Holdings LLC
Defendant:
John Doe
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe
as 3:2024cv01879
Defendant:
John Doe
Plaintiff:
Strike 3 Holdings LLC
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
Strike 3 Holdings LLC v. Doe
as 3:2024cv01876
Defendant:
John Doe
Plaintiff:
Strike 3 Holdings LLC
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
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.
