Cases 1 - 10 of 1,337
Daniel Ochoa v. The United States of America
as 2:2024cv03279
Plaintiff:
Daniel Ochoa
Defendant:
The United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action
Franco Rodriguez, et al. v. Garland
as 24-2305
Petitioner:
EDER JOSUE FRANCO RODRIGUEZ, ANA YADIRA VALENCIA OCHOA and NICOLE FRANCO VALENCIA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Toledo et al v. Palafox et al
as 4:2024cv00195
Plaintiff:
Emma Ochoa Toledo and Edgar Casahonda
Defendant:
Andrew Palafox, Francisco Serrano, Nogales, City of and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Ochoa-Giron v. Garland
as 24-1930
Petitioner:
ALLISON ITZAYANA OCHOA-GIRON
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Dimas v. Warner
as 1:2024cv03044
Petitioner:
Ricardo Ochoa Dimas
Respondent:
Jack Warner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Ochoa Contreras, et al. v. Garland
as 24-1407
Petitioner:
JAMES PAUL OCHOA CONTRERAS, VICTORIA FLORES PALACIOS and JAMIE JAMES OCHOA FLORES
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Glafiro Gonzalez v. Federal Bureau of Prison et al
as 2:2024cv01944
Plaintiff:
Glafiro Gonzalez
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prison, Warden USP Lompoc, Assistant Warden USP Lompoc and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Padilla Ochoa, et al. v. Garland
as 24-1005
Petitioner:
EDWIN ALEXANDER PADILLA OCHOA, ERIKA FAVIOLA BERMUDEZ CRUZ, KENDALL MAYBETH PADILLA BERMUDEZ and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Trujillo-Ochoa v. Garland
as 24-838
Petitioner:
FELIPE TRUJILLO-OCHOA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Gutierrez-Valencia #091102 v. Thornell et al
as 2:2024cv00300
Plaintiff:
Luis Gutierrez-Valencia
Defendant:
Ryan Thornell, Sean Malone, Julie Bowers 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.
