Cases 1 - 10 of 18
David Carmely v. US
as 23-1645
Plaintiff / Appellee:
DAVID ABRAHAM CARMELY and MICHAL BARAMI CARMELY
Defendant / Appellant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Abimael Enrique Corea Lopez et al v. Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv09080
Plaintiff:
Abimael Enrique Corea Lopez, Adan Edilber Cuadra Mejia, Adolfo Bladimiro Flores Cruz and others
Defendant:
Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc. and Does 1 through 50, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
(PC) Joseph v. Son et al
as 2:2022cv01558
Plaintiff:
David Abraham Joseph
Defendant:
Monivirin Son, Amador County Sheriff Department and Jeremy Martin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv01753
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (National Origin)
Maisel v. Saul
as 6:2021cv03042
Defendant:
Andrew M. Saul
Plaintiff:
David Abraham Maisel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Carmely et al v. United States of America
as 3:2020cv00689
Plaintiff:
David Abraham Carmely and Michal Barami Carmely
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
Carmely v. Carmely et al
as 3:2020cv00688
Plaintiff:
David Abraham Carmely
Defendant:
Michal Barami Carmely and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
JUAREZ v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv58140
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
DAVID ABRAHAM JUAREZ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
David Romero v. William Barr
as 19-71160
Petitioner:
DAVID ABRAHAM ESCOBAR ROMERO
Respondent:
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General
Ricardo Calderon-Lopez v. David Silberman, et al
as 18-15449
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RICARDO J. CALDERON-LOPEZ, DBA Starlight Consulting Services
Defendant - Appellee:
DAVID ABRAHAM SILBERMAN, ANDREW ARMANDO, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO SHERIFF'S OFFICE and others
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.
