Cases 51 - 60 of 100
Gill v United States et al
as 1:2016cv11328
Plaintiff:
STEPHEN GILL
Defendant:
United States, Ashton B. Carter and Raymond E Mabus, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv01112
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Doe et al v. USA et al
as 3:2016cv00640
Plaintiff:
James Doe and Susan Doe
Defendant:
USA , United States Department of Defense , Ashton B. Carter and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv00774
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Hamid Razak, et al v. Barack Obama, et al
as 16-5074
Petitioner - Appellant:
Hamid Al Razak, Detainee
Petitioner - Appellee:
Bisher Al Rawi, As next friend of Hamid Al Razak
Respondent - Appellee:
Barack Obama, President of the United States, Ashton B. Carter, Secretary, United States Department of Defense, Peter J. Clarke, Army Brigadier General, Commander Joint Task Force-GTMO and others
SINGH et al v. MCCONVILLE et al
as 1:2016cv00581
Plaintiff:
KANWAR BIR SINGH , HARPAL SINGH and SATWINDER SINGH
Defendant:
JAMES C. MCCONVILLE , DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE , ASHTON B. CARTER and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv00289
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Tanner v. Carter
as 3:2016cv00631
Plaintiff:
Pamela Tanner
Defendant:
Ashton B. Carter
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2016cv03035
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 791 Job Discrimination (Rehabilitation Act)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2016cv03035
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 791 Job Discrimination (Rehabilitation Act)
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.
