Cases 21 - 30 of 1,325
MPOY v. JOHN BURST et al
as 1:2023cv03027
Plaintiff:
BRUNO K. MPOY
Defendant:
JOHN BURST, DONIELLE POWE and MURIEL BOWSER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MOSKOVITS v. HARRIS et al
as 1:2023cv02958
Plaintiff:
ALEXANDER MOSKOVITS
Defendant:
SCOTT S. HARRIS and REDMOND K. BARNES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03025
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
PATEL v. LIU et al
as 1:2023cv02699
Plaintiff:
KASHYAP PATEL and ROD ROSENSTEIN
Defendant:
JESSIE K. LIU, ROBERT HUR, ED O'CALLAHAN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
PATEL v. GARLAND et al
as 1:2023cv03215
Plaintiff:
RAJ K. PATEL
Defendant:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ADAIR FORD BOROUGHS, KAMALA D. HARRIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03168
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
WELLS v. ROBERTS et al
as 1:2023cv02533
Plaintiff:
LEROY LAMONT WELLS
Defendant:
JOHN ROBERTS, DSG, JOHN DOES and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
REED v. CUSHWA et al
as 1:2023cv03117
Petitioner:
ROBERT ANDREW REED
Respondent:
PATRICIA K. CUSHWA, CHRISTOPHER WHITMER and COLLETTE PETERS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv02652
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv02697
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
