Cases 11 - 20 of 1,719
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00846
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12112 Americans with Disabilities Act - Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00100
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Shamo v. USA
as 2:2023cv00727
Petitioner:
Aaron Michael Shamo
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Koerber v. USA
as 2:2023cv00737
Petitioner:
Claud R. Koerber
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
UPS Supply Chain Solutions Inc. v. Keyword Trucking LLC et al
as 2:2023cv00716
Plaintiff:
UPS Supply Chain Solutions Inc.
Defendant:
Keyword Trucking LLC, Mediterranean Shipping Company, S.A., Mediterranean Shipping Company (USA) Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 49 U.S.C. § 14706 Carmack Amendment to the Interstate Commerce Act / Liability of Carriers - Receipts & Bills
Cuara R. v. Cayman National Bank et al
as 2:2023cv00669
Plaintiff:
Constantino Cuara R.
Defendant:
Cayman National Bank, Scotiabank Cayman Islands, HSBC Bermuda Bank and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Cuara R. v. Nestle USA et al
as 2:2023cv00649
Plaintiff:
Constantino Cuara R.
Defendant:
Nestle USA, Northrop, Hexcel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
In Re: Solans Portillo
as 2:2023mc00514
In Re:
Santiago Alejandro Solans Portillo
Petitioner:
USA
Respondent:
Respondent Placeholder
Geddes v. USA
as 1:2023cv00091
Petitioner:
Derald Wilford Geddes
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Santos-Ontiveros v. USA
as 2:2023cv00505
Petitioner:
Rufino Santos-Ontiveros
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
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.
