Cases 11 - 20 of 86
Flores Orellana v. Johns
as 5:2020cv00072
Petitioner:
Maykol Alberto Flores Orellana
Respondent:
Tracy Johns
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
United States of America v. $51,574 in United States Currency
as 3:2020cv01405
Defendant:
$51,574 in United States Currency
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Claimant:
Alberto Flores
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881
Jorge Alberto Flores, II v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 2:2020cv01557
Plaintiff:
Jorge Alberto Flores, II
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, NA v. Maya Nudel et al
as 2:2019cv10099
Defendant:
Judy Simon, Carlos Alvarado, Does 1-10 inclusive and others
Plaintiff:
The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, NA
San Jose Restaurant, Inc. v. Laura Pontones
as 19-445
Petitioner:
SAN JOSE OF ROANOKE RAPIDS, INC., SAN JOSE MEXICAN RESAURANT OF ELIZABETHTOWN, INC., EDGAR FLORES and others
Respondent:
LAURA PONTONES, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
USA v. Nabor Acosta-Barrera, et al
as 19-2143
Defendant / Appellee:
ALBERTO FLORES-HERNANDEZ and NABOR ACOSTA-BARRERA
Plaintiff / Appellant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Enrique Balboa-Palacios v. William Barr
as 19-72495
Respondent:
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General
Petitioner:
ENRIQUE BALBOA-PALACIOS, AKA Alberto Flores-Alarcon, AKA Cesar Gaona-Rodriguez, AKA Xavier Palacios, AKA Jose Suarez-Perez
USA v. Juan Flores-Jimenez
as 19-13147
Defendant / Appellant:
JUAN ALBERTO FLORES-JIMENEZ, a.k.a. Juan Cantu
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
USA v. Juan Flores-Jimenez
as 19-13148
Defendant / Appellant:
JUAN ALBERTO FLORES-JIMENEZ, a.k.a. Stoner, a.k.a. Juan Cantu
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Raul Flores-Medina v. William Barr
as 19-71303
Petitioner:
RAUL ALBERTO FLORES-MEDINA
Respondent:
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General
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.
