Cases 1 - 10 of 442
JEAN-BAPTISTE v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al
as 1:2024cv01040
Plaintiff:
HAROLD JEAN-BAPTISTE
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, MERRICK B. GARLAND, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
SEDITA v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2024cv00900
Plaintiff:
GIUSEPPE SEDITA
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, MERRICK GARLAND and CHRISTOPHER WRAY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00839
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0706 Judicial Review of Agency Actions
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00662
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00219
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
JEAN-BAPTISE v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al
as 1:2024cv00244
Plaintiff:
HAROLD JEAN-BAPTISE
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, MERRICK B. GARLAND, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03589
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
CASE NUMBER NOT USED
as 1:2023cv03359
Plaintiff:
MOHAMMAD NASIEF
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and CHRISTOPHER WRAY
NASIEF v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION et al
as 1:2023mc00124
Plaintiff:
MOHAMMAD NASIEF
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and CHRISTOPHER WRAY
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv03245
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0706 Judicial Review of Agency Actions
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.
