Cases 1 - 10 of 71
USA v. Jose Acosta-Pinedo
as 24-11465
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
JOSE ANTONIO ACOSTA-PINEDO
Eminence Corporation of Maryland v. Pierluisi-Urrutia et al
as 3:2024cv01188
Plaintiff:
EMINENCE CORPORATION OF MARYLAND
Defendant:
Pedro Pierluisi-Urrutia, Manuel Cidre-Miranda, Treasury Department of Puerto Rico and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
Diaz-Santiago v. Sanchez-Acosta, et al
as 24-1256
Plaintiff:
RAY LEONERDIRT DIAZ-SANTIAGO and RAY LEONERDIRT DIAZ, II
Defendant:
JOSE SANCHEZ-ACOSTA, Attorney and MANUEL CIDRE-MIRANDA
Diaz-Santiago v. Sanchez-Acosta et al
as 3:2024cv01011
Plaintiff:
Ray Leonerdirt Diaz-Santiago
Defendant:
Jose Sanchez-Acosta and Manuel Cidre-Miranda
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Acosta v. Monarez
as 2:2023cv02395
Petitioner:
Jose Angel Acosta
Respondent:
Unknown Monarez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Acosta v. Hudson
as 2:2023cv01909
Petitioner:
Jose Angel Acosta
Respondent:
Unknown Hudson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv06624
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Elescano et al v. K&P Facilities Maintenance, Inc. et al
as 7:2023cv00175
Plaintiff:
Rosa Elescano, Jose Carlos Acosta, Katerinne Panizo and others
Defendant:
K&P Facilities Maintenance, Inc. and Carlos Espinoza
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Jose Acosta-Anchondo v. Merrick B. Garland
as 22-3641
Petitioner:
Jose A. Acosta-Anchondo
Respondent:
Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General of the United States
Acosta-Saldana v. Garland
as 22-1368
Petitioner:
JOSE EDEL ACOSTA-SALDANA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, 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.
