Cases 1 - 10 of 986
Amelio v. Quicken Loans, Inc.
as 24-1619
Plaintiff:
ALFONSO AMELIO, CARMINE AMELIO and CLEMENTE AMELIO
Defendant:
QUICKEN LOANS, INC., FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, MCABE, WESIBURG & CONWAY, P.C. and others
Segundo-Tapia v. Garland
as 24-3351
Petitioner:
VICTOR ALFONSO SEGUNDO-TAPIA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Herrera-Martinez v. Garland
as 24-3273
Petitioner:
EDUARDO ALFONSO HERRERA-MARTINEZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
G&G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. Chihuahua Mexican Restaurant LLC et al
as 4:2024cv01618
Plaintiff:
G&G Closed Circuit Events, LLC
Defendant:
Chihuahua Mexican Restaurant LLC doing business as Chihuahua Mexican Restaurant and Alfonso Avila doing business as Chihuahua Mexican Restaurant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed Question: Fed Communications Act of 1
Rupp, et al. v. Bonta
as 24-2583
Plaintiff:
STEVEN RUPP, STEVEN DEMBER, CHERYL JOHNSON and others
Defendant:
ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California
Maria Tribin, et al v. Alexandra Herrera, et al
as 24-11166
Plaintiff:
MARIA CAROLINA TRIBIN and PABLO TRIBIN
Defendant:
ALEXANDRA BELTRAN HERRERA, a.k.a. Jhon Alexander Beltran Herrera a.k.a. Rodrigo Pirinolo, DIEGO ALFONSO NAVARRETE BELTRAN and FUERZAS ARMADAS REVOLUCIONARIAS DE COLOMBIA, a.k.a. FARC a.k.a. Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia
Cuper Development LLC et al v. City of Cudahy et al
as 2:2024cv02833
Plaintiff:
Cuper Development LLC, Go Cudahy LLC, Davina LLC and others
Defendant:
City of Cudahy, Alfonso Noyola, Elizabeth Alcantar and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
US v. Belhassan
as 24-1303
Appellant:
UNITED STATES
Defendant:
MEHDI BELHASSAN
Interested Party:
GUIOMAR ALVAREZ, DONNIE AMADO, MATHIEU AMAR and others
Diaz-Orosco v. Garland
as 24-1627
Petitioner:
JULIO ALFONSO DIAZ-OROSCO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
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.
