Cases 11 - 20 of 633
Sumalai Sapphaithoon v. Ampaunchit Wiwatniwong et al
as 2:2024cv05429
Defendant:
Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Bunthiwa Sae Tang, Posey Chan and others
Plaintiff:
Sumalai Sapphaithoon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv01342
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Google LLC, Ho Chan Kim Et Al
as 5:2024mc80152
Plaintiff:
Ho Chan Kim
Interested Party:
Google LLC
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Chan et al v. Stefanski et al
as 3:2024cv03631
Plaintiff:
Amanda Jones, Gabriel Chan, Stefan Ascierto and others
Defendant:
Robert Sinnott, City of San Rafael and John Stefanski
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
In re: Naturalization Ceremony 06/25/24
as 3:2024mc80145
Unknown:
Krishna Kumar Yerur, Ferdinand Carbonell Malimban, Teodoro Mercado and others
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Styles et al v. The Bank of Missouri et al
as 3:2024cv03137
Plaintiff:
Alona Jennings, Charles Haeussinger, Noah Meiner and others
Defendant:
The Bank of Missouri, First Electronic Bank, Concora Credit Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
Chan et al v.Val-Chris Investments, Inc
as 3:2024cv02764
Plaintiff:
Suzanne Nagy Chan and David Chan
Defendant:
Val-Chris Investments, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Foreclosure
(PC) Saechao v. Newsom et al
as 2:2024cv01333
Plaintiff:
Saechao Chan and Chan Saechao
Defendant:
Gavin Newsom and Scott
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Chan v. Equinix, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv02656
Plaintiff:
Wayne Chan
Defendant:
Equinix, Inc., Charles Meyers and Keith D. Taylor
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv02491
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
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.
