Cases 1 - 10 of 72
Khan v. Riddle et al
as 1:2024cv02481
Plaintiff:
Shiraz Khan
Defendant:
Kevin J. Riddle and Alejandro Mayorkas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00403
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv14539
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
Khan et al v. Mayorkas et al
as 1:2023cv02279
Plaintiff:
Ummama Khan and Muhammad Khan
Defendant:
Alejandro Mayorkas and Kevin Riddle
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0701 Administrative Procedure Act
Khan v. Qatar Airways Corporation
as 1:2022cv07035
Plaintiff:
Mariam Khan
Defendant:
Qatar Airways Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Contract Default
REM Properties v. Exxon Mobil Corp et al
as 1:2022cv05108
Plaintiff:
REM Properties
Defendant:
Exxon Mobil Corp doing business as ExxonMobil, Indus of Illinois, Inc. and Amjad Z Khan
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 6901 Resource & Recovery Act
Reazuddin v. Gold Coast Exotic Imports, LLC et al
as 1:2022cv03643
Plaintiff:
Michael Reazuddin
Defendant:
Gold Coast Exotic Imports, LLC, Joseph J. Perillo, Mir Imad Khan and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Nazir Khan v. Presence Chicago Hospitals Net, et al
as 21-2159
Defendant / Appellee:
THOMAS MULVAR, PRESENCE CHICAGO HOSPITALS NETWORK, doing business as PRESENCE ST. MARY AND ST. ELIZABETH HOSPITALS,, NORMA THORNTON and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
NAZIR KHAN
Bradley Simmons v. Doctor Khan, et al
as 21-1974
Defendant / Appellee:
DOCTOR KHAN, WILLIAM YODER, DOCTOR KILLIGAN and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
BRADLEY SIMMONS
Michael Hughes v. Jane Doe, et al
as 20-1924
Defendant / Appellee:
FAUZIA KHAN and JANE DOE
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL T. HUGHES
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.
