Cases 1 - 10 of 61
Louis Branch v. D. Umphenour, et al
as 22-15047
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LOUIS BRANCH
Defendant / Appellee:
D. UMPHENOUR, Building 250 Officer, Avenal Prison, L. SZALAI, C/O and J. ALVAREZ, C/O
Defendant:
N. GRANNIS, Chief, Inmate Appeals Branch, Sacramento, KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS and A. MANCINAS, Classification and Parole Representative, Avenal Prison
Louis Branch v. D. Umphenour, et al
as 20-15185
Defendant:
A. MANCINAS, Classification and Parole Representative, Avenal Prison, N. GRANNIS, Chief, Inmate Appeals Branch, Sacramento and KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS
Defendant / Appellee:
D. UMPHENOUR, Building 250 Officer, Avenal Prison, L. SZALAI, C/O and J. ALVAREZ, C/O
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LOUIS BRANCH
Andy Delgado Rodriguez v. Kathy Mendoza-Power
as 14-15287
Petitioner - Appellant:
ANDY DELGADO RODRIGUEZ
Respondent - Appellee:
KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS
Ralph Hawthorne, Jr. v. Kathy Mendoza-Power, et al
as 13-15176
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RALPH HAWTHORNE, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
KATHY MENDOZA-POWER and K. HENRY
Ruben Sanchez v. Kathy Power
as 10-56694
Petitioner - Appellant:
RUBEN SANCHEZ
Respondent - Appellee:
KATHY MENDOZA POWERS, Warden
Arnold Trevino v. Kathy Mendoza-Power
as 10-17338
Petitioner - Appellee:
ARNOLD TREVINO
Respondent - Appellant:
KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS
Andre Wiley, Sr. v. Kathy Mendoza-Power
as 10-56471
Petitioner - Appellant:
ANDRE LAVELLE WILEY, SR.
Respondent - Appellee:
KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS
Lon Carter v. Nick Dawson, et al
as 10-16662
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LON DERRICK CARTER
Defendant - Appellee:
NICK DAWSON, Warden and KATHY MENDOZA POWERS
Eddie Jones v. Kathy Mendoza-Power
as 10-15764
Petitioner - Appellee:
EDDIE JONES
Respondent - Appellant:
KATHY MENDOZA-POWERS
Ralph Hawthorne, Jr. v. Kathy Mendoza-Power, et al
as 10-15571
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RALPH HAWTHORNE, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
KATHY MENDOZA-POWER and K. HENRY
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.
