Cases 151 - 160 of 429
United States of America v. $309,305.24 in U.S. Currency and 1563.27272312 Digital Currency Bitcoins
as 1:2015cv03474
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
$309,305.24 in U.S. Currency and 1563.27272312 Digital Currency Bitcoins
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
United States of America v. $12,735.53 in U.S. Currency
as 8:2015cv03475
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
$12,735.53 in U.S. Currency
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
United States of America v. 3301 Oak Street, Manchester, Maryland 21102
as 1:2015cv02808
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
3301 Oak Street, Manchester, Maryland 21102
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Mamalis v. United States of America
as 1:2015cv02504
Plaintiff:
Nikolaos Mamalis
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: Motion for Return of Property
Dixon-Bey v. United States of America
as 1:2015cv02490
Plaintiff:
Jenerette Charles Dixon-Bey
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: Motion for Return of Property
Barren v. United States of America
as 8:2015cv02397
Petitioner:
David Barren
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: Motion for Return of Property
Pratt v. United States of America
as 1:2015cv02503
Plaintiff:
Aaron Pratt
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: Motion for Return of Property
United States of America v. $57,320.00 U.S. Currency
as 1:2015cv02324
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
$57,320.00 U.S. Currency
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
United States of America v. $125,857.00 in U.S. Currency
as 1:2015cv02124
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
$125,857.00 in U.S. Currency
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
United States of America v. $413,353.31 in U.S. Currency
as 1:2015cv01848
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
$413,353.31 in U.S. Currency
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
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.
