Cases 11 - 20 of 53
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
Smocks v. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
as 4:2022cv00592
Plaintiff:
Mr Troy Anthony Smocks
Defendant:
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
NetChoice v. Paxton
as 21-51178
Plaintiff / Appellee:
NetChoice, L.L.C., a 501(c)(6) District of Columbia organization doing business as NetChoice and Computer & Communications Industry Association, a 501(c) (6) non-stock Virginia Corporation doing business as CCIA
Defendant / Appellant:
Ken Paxton, in his official capacity as Attorney General of Texas
Amicus Curiae:
Texas Public Policy Foundation, Babylon Bee LLC, Giganews, Incorporated and others
Not Classified By Court:
Not the Bee LLC and Leonid Goldstein
NetChoice LLC et al v. Paxton
as 1:2021cv00840
Plaintiff:
NetChoice LLC a 501(c)(6) District of Columbia organization doing business as NetChoice and Computer & Communications Industry Association a 501(c)(6) non-stock Virginia Corporation doing business as CCIA
Defendant:
Ken Paxton
Amicus Curiae:
Chamber of Progress, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, The American Civil Liberties Union and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
United States of America v. State of Texas
as 1:2021cv00796
Plaintiff:
United States Of America
Defendant:
State of Texas
Intervenor Defendant:
Erick Graham, Jeff Tuley, Mistie Sharp and others
Amicus Curiae:
State of Massachusetts, State of California, State of Colorado and others
Petitioner:
Felipe Gomez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 USA Plaintiff
TX Leag Untd Latin Amer Ctzn, et al v. Greg Abbott, Governor of Texas
as 20-50867
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Mexican American Legislative Caucus, Texas House of Representatives, Barbara Mason, National League of United Latin American Citizens and others
Amicus Curiae:
Chris Hollins, In his Official Capacity as Harris County Clerk, Election Law Scholars, Nicholas Stephanopoulos and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Ruth Hughs, in her official capacity as Texas Secretary of State
Parham et al v. Watson et al
as 3:2020cv00572
Defendant:
Lynn Fitch and Michael D. Watson, Jr.
Plaintiff:
Jed Oppenheim, Mississippi State Conference of the N.A.A.C.P., League of Women Voters Mississippi and others
Amicus Curiae:
The State of California, The State of New York, The State of Rhode Island and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Van Allen v. Chief Judge of the First Circuit et al
as 1:2020cv00534
Defendant:
SCOTUS, Chief Judge of the Eighth Circuit, Chief Judge of the Seventh Circuit and others
Plaintiff:
Harold William Van Allen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Braidwood Management Inc. et al. v. Xavier Becerra et al.
as 4:2020cv00283
Plaintiff:
John Kelley, Kelley Orthodontics, Joel Starnes and others
Defendant:
Steven T. Mnuchin, Alex M. Azar II, Eugene Scalia and others
Amicus Curiae:
State of Illinois, State of California, State of Colorado and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
John C. Schwartz, D.D.S. v Delta Dental Plans Association, et al
as 2:2020cv00018
Defendant:
Delta Dental of Wisconsin, Delta Dental Plans Association, Delta Dental Plan of West Virginia, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
John C. Schwartz, D.D.S, A Professional Corporation and John C. Schwartz, D.D.S.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
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.
