Cases 21 - 30 of 276
(HC) Nguyen v. Acevedo
as 2:2023cv01086
Petitioner:
Dai Nguyen
Respondent:
Acevedo
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Acevedo v. Kijakazi
as 3:2023cv01162
Plaintiff:
Jorge Acevedo
Defendant:
Kilolo Kijakazi
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 id Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv00930
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00591
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
J.A. v. The United States of America
as 2:2023cv02668
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Acevedo and J. A.
Defendant:
The United States of America
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1396 - Tort Negligence
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv03886
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrimination
Arthur Acevedo v. Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv02625
Plaintiff:
Arthur Acevedo
Defendant:
Boot Barn Holdings, Inc. and Boot Barn, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Labor/Mgmnt. Relations
Kawanna-Shawntaye Gritney v. State of California et al
as 8:2023cv00479
Plaintiff:
Kawanna-Shawntaye Gritney
Defendant:
State of California, Victor Acevedo, Devon Ramos and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
(SS)Acevedo v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2023cv00590
Plaintiff:
Ernest Gill Acevedo, Jr.
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
Sharrod Moten v. Calderon et al
as 2:2023cv02595
Plaintiff:
Sharrod Moten
Defendant:
Enriquez, Smith, Werner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
