Cases 101 - 110 of 241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv01957
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Misternovo Bamaca-Cifuentes, et al v. Attorney General United State
as 16-3104
Petitioner:
MISTERNOVO BAMACA-CIFUENTES, BYRON DONALDO BAMACA-BAUTISTA and ABNER ABDIEL BAMACA-BAUTISTA
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Stangl v. Cifuentes
as 1:2016cv00985
Plaintiff:
Mark Stangl
Defendant:
Andres Cifuentes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
USA v. Angel Hernandez-Cifuente
as 16-40550
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
ANGEL HERNANDEZ-CIFUENTES
Black v. Caudle et al
as 5:2016cv05072
Plaintiff:
Douglas Wayne Black
Defendant:
Tim Caudle, Joe Standrod, C. Mitchell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP) et al v. Regents of University of California et al
as 4:2016cv01575
Plaintiff:
Defend Affirmative Action Party (DAAP) , Michael Cortez-Mejia , Stephanie Nicole Garcia and others
Defendant:
Regents of University of California , Associated Students of the University of California at Berkeley , Janet Napolitano and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Noe Cifuentes v. Loretta Lynch
as 16-3238
Petitioner:
NOE JEREMIAS CIFUENTES
Respondent:
LORETTA E. LYNCH, U.S. Attorney General
Freddie Warren v. John Doe Officers 1-5
as 1:2015cv11879
Plaintiff:
Freddie Warren
Movant:
Gregory E. Kulis & Associates, Ltd.
Defendant:
P.O. Berka, P.O. Cifuentes, P.O. R. Ruiz and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Schwenke v. Helder et al
as 5:2015cv05303
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Schwenke
Defendant:
Tim Helder , Jacob Cifuentes and John or Jane Doe Medical Staff
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2015cv01539
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
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.
