Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Jamal Uddin v. Joseph Biden, Jr.
as 22-1512
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMAL UDDIN, Ph.D
Defendant / Appellee:
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., currently serving as the President of the United States
Uddin v. Biden, Jr.
as 8:2022cv00816
Plaintiff:
Jamal Uddin, Ph.D
Defendant:
Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv07744
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01874
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv00261
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
First Bay State Group, Inc. et al v. United States of America
as 1:2020cv12242
Plaintiff:
First Bay State Group, Inc., a MA Corp. d/b/a Rosa's Family Market, Jamal Uddin and First Bay State Group, Inc. a Massachusetts Corporation doing business as Rosa's Family Market
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2019cv04031
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Uddin et al v. KC Restaurant Group, LLC et al
as 1:2016cv08238
Plaintiff:
Jamal Uddin , Nizam Uddin , Md. Shamim Ahmed and others
Defendant:
KC Restaurant Group, LLC, Peter Grunauer and Walter
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Chowdhury v. USCIS
as 1:2013cv00486
Petitioner:
Jamal Uddin Chowdhury
Respondent:
USCIS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Roman v. The Dinex Group, LLC et al
as 1:2012cv06156
Plaintiff:
Graciela Roman , Mazidur Rahman , Mohammed Jamal Uddin and others
Defendant:
The Dinex Group, LLC and Daniel Boulud
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
