Cases 11 - 20 of 32
Chiang v. Donahoe
as 13-4824
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Kuo R. Chiang
Defendant - Appellee:
Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, Postmaster General of The United States Postal Service
National Post Office Collaborate et al v. Donahoe et al
as 3:2013cv01406
Plaintiff:
National Post Office Collaborate , Center for Art and Mindfulness, Inc. and Kaysay H. Abrha
Defendant:
Patrick R. Donahoe and United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321
Perkins v. Donahoe
as 1:2013cv05226
Plaintiff:
Dorothy Perkins
Defendant:
Patrick R. Donahoe and United States Postal Service
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Hixon v. Donahoe et al
as 2:2013cv12439
Plaintiff:
Darnell A. Hixon
Defendant:
Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmast General and James E Tanksley
In Re: UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE PRIVACY ACT PROTECTIVE ORDER
as 1:2013mc00501
Petitioner:
PATRICK R. DONAHOE
Cause Of Action: Motion for Protective Order
WASHINGTON v. DONAHOE et al
as 8:2013cv00339
Plaintiff:
DEBBIE WASHINGTON
Defendant:
Patrick R. Donahoe, PRINCE JONES, NIGEL MCCLEAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
WASHINGTON v. DONAHOE et al
as 1:2013cv00041
Plaintiff:
DEBBIE WASHINGTON
Defendant:
PATRICK R. DONAHOE, PRINCE JONES, NIGEL MCCLEAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Ho Y. Wong v. Patrick Donahoe
as 12-2568
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HO Y. WONG
Defendant - Appellee:
PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Postermaster General and ABDUL R. BAH, Manager, General Accounting Branch USPS
IDROGO v. DONAHOE et al
as 1:2012cv02066
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL IDROGO
Defendant:
PATRICK R. DONAHOE, JO BONNER and HOPE ANDRADE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Wong v. Donahoe et al
as 2:2012cv00636
Plaintiff:
Ho Y. Wong
Defendant:
Patrick R. Donahoe and Abdul R. Bah
Cause Of Action: 39 U.S.C. § 409 Postal Service
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.
