Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Damas-Torres v. Garland
as 23-60496
Petitioner:
Karla Patricia Damas-Torres, Brithani Esperanza Lopez-Damas and Yostin Josue Lopez-Damas
Respondent:
Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General
Lopez v. Kijakazi
as 1:2023cv03092
Plaintiff:
Nataly Esperanza Lopez
Defendant:
Kilolo Kijakazi
Interested Party:
SSA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Lopez v. Social Security Administration
as 1:2023cv00478
Plaintiff:
Christina Esperanza Lopez
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Lopez Loja v. Garland
as 21-6619
Petitioner:
BLANCA ESPERANZA LOPEZ and JAIME ARTURO LOPEZ LOJA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Leticia Lopez-Reynoso v. U.S. Attorney General
as 20-11832
Petitioner:
GASPAR RENE LOPEZ-LOPEZ, LETICIA ESPERANZA LOPEZ-REYNOSO, KARINA GABRIELA LOPEZ-LOPEZ and others
Respondent:
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
Nohemy Lopez-Reyes, et al v. Attorney General United States
as 20-1862
Petitioner:
E. J. L. L. and NOHEMY ESPERANZA LOPEZ REYES
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Esperanza Lopez Manzo v. Energizer Holdings, Inc. et al
as 2:2019cv02844
Plaintiff:
Esperanza Lopez Manzo
Defendant:
Energizer, LLC, Energizer Holdings, Inc., Energizer Manufacturing, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Mejia Mendez et al v. Sweet Sam's Baking Company LLC et al
as 1:2018cv09910
Defendant:
Sweet Sam's Baking Company LLC, Esperanza Lopez and David Grogan
Plaintiff:
Andres Perez and Kelvin Mejia Mendez
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Olga Lopez-Grijalba v. Loretta Lynch
as 16-60564
Petitioner:
OLGA ESPERANZA LOPEZ-GRIJALBA
Respondent:
LORETTA LYNCH, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
Norma Lopez-Orellana v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 13-71781
Petitioner:
NORMA ESPERANZA LOPEZ-ORELLANA
Respondent:
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General
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.
