Cases 11 - 20 of 148
Rocky Mountain Peace & Justice Center, et al v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, et al
as 21-1310
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ROCKY MOUNTAIN PEACE & JUSTICE CENTER, CANDELAS GLOWS/ROCKY FLATS GLOWS, ROCKY FLATS RIGHT TO KNOW and others
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, MARTHA WILLIAMS, in her official capacity as Principal Deputy Director, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, DEBRA HAALAND, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Interior and others
State of Missouri, et al v. Joseph Biden, Jr., et al
as 21-3013
Plaintiff / Appellant:
State of Missouri, State of Arizona, State of Arkansas and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Joseph R. Biden, Jr., in his official capacity as the President of the United States of America, Shalanda Young, in her official capacity as the Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Cecilia Rouse, in her official capacity as Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers and others
Tassy v. Buttigieg
as 21-1425
Defendant / Appellee:
Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Jean-Claude Tassy
S. Mendel v. Liane Randolph, et al
as 21-15910
Defendant:
ELAINE L. CHAO, in her official capacity as U.S. Secretary of Transportation, ANNE KRAMER, Attorney of the law firm Lichten & Liss-Riordan, P.C., MICHAEL PICKER, in his individual and official capacity as President, Commissioner, California Public Utilities Commission and others
Defendant / Appellee:
CLIFFORD RECHTSCHFFEN, in his indiviual and official capacity as Commissioner, California Public Utilities Commission, UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., MARITZA PEREZ, in her individual and official capacity as Section Supervisor Badge #11 Transportationb License Section California Public Utilities Commission and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
S. PATRICK MENDEL
Watson v. USD 500, et al
as 21-3057
Defendant / Appellee:
USD 500, KANSAS CITY, KANSAS
Defendant:
ANITA ROCHA, Assistant Director of Transportation, LENORA MILLER, Executive Director of Operations, SANDY KIPER, Secretary of Transportation and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CARMEN NAOMI WATSON
State of Texas et al v. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., et al
as 3:2021cv00065
Plaintiff:
State of North Dakota, State of Nebraska, State of Ohio and others
Defendant:
United States Of America, Jennifer Granholm, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Energy, Scott De La Vega, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Interior and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. ยง 551
Puyallup Tribe of Indians v. Pipeline and Hazardous Materia, et al
as 21-1009
Respondent:
Howard R. Elliott, in his official capacity as Administrator of Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Steven G. Bradbury, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of Transportation, United States of America and others
Petitioner:
Puyallup Tribe of Indians
State of Washington v. FMCSA, et al
as 20-73730
Respondent:
FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, RAYMOND MARTINEZ, in his official capacity as Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Administrator and ELAINE L. CHAO, in her official capacity as Secretary of Transportation
Petitioner:
STATE OF WASHINGTON
Puyallup Tribe of Indians v. PHMSA, et al
as 20-1431
Respondent:
Howard R. Elliott, in his official capacity as Administrator of Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Elaine L. Chao, in her official capacity as Secretary of Transportation, United States of America and others
Petitioner:
Puyallup Tribe of Indians
The Puyallup Tribe of Indians v. Pipeline & Hazardous Materials, et al
as 20-72472
Respondent:
HOWARD R. ELLIOTT, in his official capacity as Administrator of Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, ELAINE L. CHAO, in her official capacity as Secretary of Transportation, PIPELINE & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION and others
Petitioner:
THE PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS
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.
