Cases 31 - 40 of 48
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv01639
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Park et al v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services et al
as 1:2022cv00450
Plaintiff:
Yong Suk Park, Young Hae Je, Ji Min Park and others
Defendant:
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Ur Mendoza Jaddou and Julie Decker
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Bishop, v. Mayorkas,
as 3:2022cv00142
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Bishop and Ghassan H. El Turk
Defendant:
Alejandro Mayorkas, Ur Mendoza Jaddou and Merrick B. Garland
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0701 Maritime Subsidy Board
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00127
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0701 Maritime Subsidy Board
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv01055
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 3:2022cv00678
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 3:2022oe00125
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2022cv00125
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00498
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 1:2022cv00333
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.
