Cases 51 - 60 of 668
Sanchez v. Bird
as 4:2022cv09106
Petitioner:
Jacinto Sanchez
Respondent:
L. Bird
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
IN RE: ARC Airbag Inflators Products Liability Litigation
as 1:2022md03051
Plaintiff:
Lisa Mann, Jimmy Mann, Richard Topa and others
Defendant:
Arc Automotive, Inc., General Motors LLC, Kia Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Motor Vehicle Product Liability
FRONTERAS v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv24069
Plaintiff:
JACINTO ALOULOC FRONTERAS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Ceto Cedillo v. Garland
as 22-1974
Petitioner:
JACINTO CETO CEDILLO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv00217
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund et al v. Nuco Painting Corp. et al
as 1:2022cv02828
Plaintiff:
Finishing Trades Institute, International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund, International Union of Painters and Allied Trades Joint Apprenticeship and Training Fund and others
Defendant:
Nuco Painting Corp. and Jason B. Jacinto
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
(HC)Robinson v. Warden
as 1:2022cv01369
Petitioner:
Jacinto Robinson
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
USA v. Davalos
as 22-50843
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Jacinto Davalos
USA v. Santos
as 22-10902
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Jacinto Guzman Santos, Jr.
Caguana v. Garland
as 22-6446
Petitioner:
JACINTO CAGUANA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES 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.
