Cases 1 - 10 of 11,829
Glimp v. United States Drug Enforcement Administration et al
as 1:2024cv05207
Plaintiff:
Thomas Madison Glimp Individually as a United States Citizen and Derivatively as an Employee-Owner of Alloyed Enterprises Corp doing business as Fine Young Cannabulls Speciality Property Insurance
Defendant:
United States Drug Enforcement Administration and United States Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Zavala-Gutierrez v. Garland
as 24-1624
Petitioner:
ZULEMA ZAVALA-GUTIERREZ, CRISTHOFFER ADONIS MADRID-ZAVALA and WILLIAM MADRID-ZAVALA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Daquilema-Marcatoma v. Garland
as 24-1630
Petitioner:
JORGE EFRAIN DAQUILEMA-MARCATOMA, MARIA JUANA YAMBA-CISLEMA and NURY PRISCILA DAQUILEMA-YAMBAY
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Claros-Pereira v. Garland
as 24-1633
Petitioner:
JOSE HUMBERTO CLAROS-PEREIRA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Duran v. The United States Attorney General et al
as 3:2024cv01518
Defendant:
The United States Attorney General, The United States Postal Service, USAG and others
Plaintiff:
Amy C Duran
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Sinche-Quito v. Garland
as 24-1599
Petitioner:
SILVIA CATALINA SINCHE-QUITO, STEVEN ELIAN JARA-SINCHE and LISBETH PAMELA JARA-SINCHE
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Appiah v. Garland
as 24-1593
Petitioner:
EMANUEL KUSI APPIAH
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Alto-Santiago v. Garland
as 24-1604
Petitioner:
BIBIANA ALTO-SANTIAGO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Lulea v. Garland
as 24-1603
Petitioner:
PUIU VALI LULEA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Chinchilla-Navarro v. Garland
as 24-1571
Petitioner:
CESAR EZEQUIEL CHINCHILLA-NAVARRO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES 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.
