Cases 11 - 20 of 52
Giscombe v. U.S. Department of State/ Bureau of Consular Affairs et al
as 6:2022cv01737
Plaintiff:
M. Antoinette Giscombe
Defendant:
U.S. Department of State/ Bureau of Consular Affairs, U.S. Department of State Office of Authentications and U.S. Department of State
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Said v. Egyptian Ministry of Interior, et al
as 8:2022cv01532
Plaintiff:
Mohamed Fathy Said
Defendant:
Egyptian Ministry of Interior, Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Egyptian Embassy in Washington D.C. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv22059
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2022cv01071
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv21867
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2022cv60816
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv20423
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Brandenburg v. Secretary of State, U.S. Department of State
as 0:2022cv60216
Plaintiff:
Leopold R. Brandenburg, Sr.
Defendant:
Secretary of State, U.S. Department of State
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0551
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2022cv00095
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2022cv00022
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0702 Administrative Procedure 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.
