Cases 1 - 10 of 31
City of Buffalo, et al. v. Hyundai Motor America, Inc., et al.
as 24-2350
Plaintiff:
CITY OF CINCINNATI, CITY OF CLEVELAND, CITY OF SEATTLE and others
Defendant:
HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, INC. and KIA MOTOR AMERICA, INC
City of Buffalo, et al. v. Hyundai Motor America, Inc., et al.
as 24-739
Respondent:
CITY OF BUFFALO, CITY OF CINCINNATI, CITY OF CLEVELAND and others
Petitioner:
HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, INC. and KIA MOTOR AMERICA, INC
VanDerStok et al v. Garland et al
as 4:2022cv00691
Plaintiff:
Jennifer VanDerStok, Michael G Andren, Tactical Machining LLC and others
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, United States Department of Justice, Steven Dettelbach and others
Petitioner:
Blackhawk Manufacturing Group Inc. d/b/a 80 Percent Arms
Amicus Curiae:
Gun Owners for Safety, Jason Perry, Ryan Busse and others
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Blackhawk Manufacturing Group Inc. doing business as 80 Percent Arms, Defense Distributed, Second Amendment Foundation Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Ardalan v. Wells Fargo & Company et al
as 3:2022cv03811
Plaintiff:
Khosrow Ardalan, SEB Investment Management AB and West Palm Beach Firefighters Pension Fund
Defendant:
Wells Fargo & Company, Charles W. Scharf, Michael P. Santomassimo and others
Petitioner:
Dean Sienna, Fire and Police Employees Retirement System of the City of Baltimore, Employees Retirement System of Rhode Island and others
Allison v. Oak Street Health, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv00149
Plaintiff:
Reginald T. Allison and City of Dearborn Police & Fire Revised Retirement System
Defendant:
Oak Street Health, Inc., Michael Pykosz, Timothy Cook and others
Petitioner:
Employees Retirement System of the City of Baltimore, Employees Retirement System of the City of Kansas City, Missouri, Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Pension Fund - Defined Benefit Plan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Securities Violation
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, et al v. EPA, et al
as 20-1265
Respondent:
Environmental Protection Agency and Andrew Wheeler, in his official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency
Petitioner:
Erie County, State of New Jersey, State of Illinois and others
Anne Arundel County, MD, et al v. FCC, et al
as 19-4165
Petitioner:
CITY OF YUMA, AZ, CITY OF BELLEVUE, WA, CITY OF WILMINGTON, DE and others
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Not Yet Classified:
NCTA - THE INTERNET & TELEVSION ASSOCIATION
Anne Arundel County, Maryland, et al v. FCC, et al
as 19-72760
Petitioner:
LAREDO, TEXAS, CHEVY CHASE VILLAGE, MARYLAND, WILMINGTON, DELAWARE and others
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
City and County of San Francisco et al v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services et al
as 4:2019cv04717
Plaintiff:
City and County of San Francisco and County of Santa Clara
Defendant:
Acting Secretary of Kevin McAleenen, Department of Homeland Security, Acting Director Kenneth T. Cuccinelli and others
Petitioner:
Community Healthcare Network, Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, America's Essential Hospitals and others
Amicus Curiae:
The Cities of Los Angeles and Oakland, California; Harris County, Texas; and 26 Additional Cities, Counties, and Local Government Agencies, City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, City of Seattle, Washington and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
American Medical Association et al v. Azar et al
as 6:2019cv00318
Defendant:
Alex M. Azar, II, United States Department of Health & Human Services, Office of Population Affairs and others
Plaintiff:
American Medical Association, Michele P. Megregian, C.N.M., Thomas N. Ewing, M.D. and others
Amicus Curiae:
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American College of Physicians, City of Chicago and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
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.
