Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Irma Cervantes v. Merrick Garland
as 23-1017
Petitioner:
IRMA MORALES CERVANTES
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
Eduardo Cervantes v. Merrick Garland
as 21-1321
Petitioner:
EDUARDO EDWIN CERVANTES
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
US v. Ricardo Cervantes-Sanchez
as 20-6887
Defendant / Appellant:
RICARDO CERVANTES-SANCHEZ, a/k/a Rica, a/k/a Barbie, a/k/a Adrian Acosta
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2019md02879
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Consolidated Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
In Re:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Special Master:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity Action
US v. Samuel Martinez Tapia
as 17-4305
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
SAMUEL MARTINEZ TAPIA, a/k/a Samuel Martinez, a/k/a Samuel Martinez Tapia, a/k/a Frank Cervantes, a/k/a Ariel Vargas, a/k/a Max Hernandez-Tapia
US v. Celso Cervantes-Hernandez
as 10-7199
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
CELSO CERVANTES-HERNANDEZ
Jorge Ramos Cervantes v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 09-1519
Petitioner:
JORGE ANTONIO RAMOS CERVANTES, PAOLA ANDREA RAMOS CERVANTES and DANIEL ALEJANDRO RAMOS CERVANTES
Respondent:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General
Brunet et al v. Quizno's Franchise Company LLC et al
as 3:2008mc00008
Plaintiff:
Bonnie Brunet, Bonnie Brunet, Martin Rist and others
Defendant:
Quizno's Franchise Company LLC, Quizno's Franchising LLC, Quizno's Franchising II LLC and others
Movant:
Martin Agency, Inc. and Martin Agency, Inc.
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Type:
Other Statutes
US v. Rogelio Cervantes-Serna
as 08-4629
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
ROGELIO CERVANTES-SERNA
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.
