Cases 1 - 10 of 1,298
Pena, et al. v. Garland
as 24-3618
Petitioner:
OSMAN FELICIANO PENA, OSMAN PENA-ZEPEDA, HERMINIA NATALY ZEPEDA-PEREZ and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Lizarraga, et al. v. NSO Group Technologies Limited, et al.
as 24-3463
Plaintiff:
DANIEL LIZARRAGA, CARLOS DADA, SERGIO ARAUZ and others
Defendant:
NSO GROUP TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED and Q CYBER TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED
Alyse Sanchez v. Alejandro Mayorkas
as 24-1487
Plaintiff:
ALYSE SANCHEZ, ELMER ONAN SANCHEZ HERNANDEZ, AMIRA ABBAS ABDALLA and others
Defendant:
ALEJANDRO N. MAYORKAS, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, PATRICK J. LECHLEITNER, Acting Director, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and MATTHEW ELLISTON, Acting Director, Maryland Field Office of ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations
Grant v. Adult Protective Service
as 24-1435
Plaintiff:
ELIZABETH GRANT, GRACE GRANT, ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES and others
Defendant:
Police Officer NATALIE BALLATO, Shield #13280, Police Officer JOSEPH DELLIGATTI, Shield #13106, Lt. WILLIAM FIELDS and others
United States of America v. Pena
as 1:2024cv11061
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Eva Pena
Pena v. Credit One Bank, N.A.
as 5:2024cv00118
Plaintiff:
Kourtney Pena
Defendant:
Credit One Bank, N.A.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. ยง 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Ham-Pena v. Garland
as 24-1287
Petitioner:
CARLOS ALBERTO HAM-PENA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Pena, et al. v. International Medical Devices, Inc., et al.
as 24-3061
Plaintiff:
EDWARD PENA and BRANDON MILLER, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated
Defendant:
INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL DEVICES, INC., MENOVA INTERNATIONAL, INC., GESIVA MEDICAL, LLC and others
Pena v. Oregon Health And Science University
as 24-3041
Plaintiff:
STEPHANIE PENA
Defendant:
OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY
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.
