Cases 1 - 10 of 38
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00566
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
GOMEZ v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2023cv00313
Plaintiff:
ALFREDO GOMEZ
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Balderas et al v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 6:2022cv00829
Plaintiff:
Raul Balderas, Felipa Balderas and Natalie Balderas
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Eric Thomas Heguy, Eleazar Luna Garcia and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Tort/Motor Vehicle (
Gomez v. V Marchese & Co
as 2:2020cv01802
Plaintiff:
Alfredo Gomez
Defendant:
V. Marchese & Co. and V Marchese & Co
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
GOMEZ VALLE v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv71107
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
ALFREDO GOMEZ VALLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GOMEZ v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv79972
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
ALFREDO GOMEZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
(PC) Gomez v. California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation et al
as 2:2020cv00198
Plaintiff:
Alfredo Gomez
Defendant:
Ralph Diaz and California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jose Gomez-Barragan v. William Barr
as 19-73301
Petitioner:
JOSE ALFREDO GOMEZ-BARRAGAN
Respondent:
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General
United States v. Cotto
as 19-2182
Defendant / Appellant:
OMIL COTTO, AKA Omil Gomez, AKA Omil Alfredo Gomez
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Alfredo Gomez v. M. E. Spearman
as 2:2019cv05557
Respondent:
M. E. Spearman
Petitioner:
Alfredo Gomez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
