Cases 11 - 20 of 6,150
Alexander v. Securus Technologies, LLC
as 6:2024cv01503
Plaintiff:
Gena Alexander
Defendant:
Securus Technologies, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Alexander v. Securus Technologies, LLC
as 6:2024cv01502
Defendant:
Securus Technologies, LLC
Plaintiff:
Gena Alexander
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM ELECTRONIC PUBLIC ACCESS FEES BY ALEXANDER ZENTEFIS
as 1:2024mc00102
Unknown:
REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION FROM ELECTRONIC PUBLIC ACCESS FEES BY ALEXANDER ZENTEFIS
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
THOMAS v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2024vv01258
Petitioner:
ALEXANDER THOMAS
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2024cv01490
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Reents v. Medguard Alert, Inc.
as 1:2024cv07156
Plaintiff:
Alexander Reents
Defendant:
Medguard Alert, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Pamon v. United States Postal Service et al
as 3:2024cv02061
Defendant:
Does 1-25, Alexander J Cleger, United States Postal Service and others
Plaintiff:
Dionne M Pamon
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1030 Computer Fraud & Abuse Act
MCAFEE v. BIDEN, JR. et al
as 1:2024cv02334
Defendant:
KAMALA D HARRIS, ANTONY J. BLINKEN and JOSEPH ROBINETTE BIDEN, JR.
Plaintiff:
ALEXANDER JUSTIN MCAFEE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE ELECTRONIC PUBLIC ACCESS FEES BY Professor Alexander Zentefis
as 2:2024mc00046
Unknown:
APPLICATION FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE ELECTRONIC PUBLIC ACCESS FEES BY Professor Alexander Zentefis
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
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.
