Cases 11 - 20 of 56
Jones v. Sandoval
as 3:2020cv07620
Defendant:
M. Sandoval
Plaintiff:
Timothy Lewis Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Timothy Jones v. M. Sandoval, et al
as 20-16452
Defendant / Appellee:
M. SANDOVAL, Correctional Officer
Defendant:
SCOTT KERNAN, Secretary of the California Department of Corrections, V. SOLIS, Associate Warden and T. FOSS, Warden
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIMOTHY JONES
SANDOVAL v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv72132
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
EDWARD M. SANDOVAL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jones v. Kernan et al
as 3:2019cv05981
Defendant:
V. Solis, Scott Kernan, M. Sandoval and others
Plaintiff:
Timothy Lewis Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jose M. Sandoval et al v. FCA US, LLC
as 2:2019cv07152
Defendant:
FCA US, LLC and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive
Plaintiff:
Anita Sandoval and Jose M. Sandoval
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Sandoval v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration
as 1:2019cv02032
Interested Party:
USAO-SS-Noticing and SSA Noticing
Plaintiff:
Milissa M Sandoval
Defendant:
Commissioner, Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Sandoval v. Commissioner Of Social Security
as 5:2019cv00081
Plaintiff:
Mariana M. Sandoval
Defendant:
Commissioner Of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Nichols v. Kerrean et al
as 3:2018cv00518
Plaintiff:
Jason Nichols
Defendant:
Scott Kerrean, E. Patty, C. Vizcarra and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nichols v. Kerrean et al
as 2:2018cv00041
Plaintiff:
Jason Nichols
Defendant:
Scott Kerrean, E. Patty, C. Vizcarra and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Daniel Sandoval v. Department of the Army, et al
as 17-36027
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DANIEL M. SANDOVAL
Defendant - Appellee:
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY and ARMY BOARD CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
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.
