Cases 31 - 40 of 386
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv04771
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 1:2022cv04669
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 1:2022cv04348
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Ramos v. Amazing Deal of Grand, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv04746
Plaintiff:
Ramon Martinez Ramos
Defendant:
Amazing Deal of Grand, Inc. doing business as 99 Cents Plaza and Jian Ren Chen
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02759
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02068
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Grazioso et al v. Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan et al
as 1:2022cv01188
Defendant:
Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda, The Taliban and others
Plaintiff:
Deborah Grazioso, Lauren Grazioso, Briana Grazioso and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2333 Civil Remedies: Anti-Terrorism Act of 1991
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00742
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 1:2022cv00725
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00081
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
