Cases 41 - 50 of 1,001
KHAN v. BLINKEN et al
as 1:2023cv03460
Plaintiff:
WARIS KHAN
Defendant:
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, RENA BITTER, ANDREW SCHOFER and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
THOMAS v. SHEEHY NISSAN OF WALDORF
as 1:2023cv03479
Plaintiff:
JOHN P. THOMAS
Defendant:
SHEEHY NISSAN OF WALDORF
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
LIU v. BLINKEN et al
as 1:2023cv03390
Plaintiff:
YILIN LIU
Defendant:
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, RENA BITTER, ARNOLD CHACON and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
WADE v. AHUJA
as 1:2023cv03262
Plaintiff:
JOHN HENRY WADE
Defendant:
KIRAN AHUJA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal
SEDAGHATDOUST v. BLINKEN et al
as 1:2023cv03218
Plaintiff:
ALIREZA SEDAGHATDOUST
Defendant:
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, RENA BITTER, SEAN MURPHY and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
MEARAJ v. BLINKEN et al
as 1:2023cv03205
Plaintiff:
SADAF MEARAJ
Defendant:
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, RENA BITTER, JOY M. SAKURAI and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
EASWARAN v. MAYORKAS et al
as 1:2023cv03112
Plaintiff:
ABDUSSAMIM SHIV EASWARAN
Defendant:
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, UR M. JADDOU, MERRICK B. GARLAND and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
MPOY v. JOHN BURST et al
as 1:2023cv03027
Plaintiff:
BRUNO K. MPOY
Defendant:
JOHN BURST, DONIELLE POWE and MURIEL BOWSER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
DOE v. BLINKEN et al
as 1:2023cv02997
Plaintiff:
JOHN DOE
Defendant:
ANTONY BLINKEN, ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0706 Judicial Review of Agency Actions
DOE v. BURNS et al
as 1:2023cv02937
Plaintiff:
JANE DOE
Defendant:
WILLIAM J. BURNS, DOUG VAN ZANDT, JOHN DOE and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Right to Privacy Act
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.
