Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Walmart Inc. v. King et al
as 6:2023cv00040
Plaintiff:
Walmart Inc.
Defendant:
Jean King, James Mchenry, Merrick Garland and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
The State of Arizona et al v. Garland et al
as 1:2023cv01324
Plaintiff:
The State of Arizona, The State of Louisiana, The State of Missouri and others
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, The United States Department of Justice, David Neal and others
Petitioner:
Innovation Law Lab
The State of Arizona et al v. Garland et al
as 1:2023mi00015
Plaintiff:
The State of Arizona, The State of Louisiana, The State of Missouri and others
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, The United States Department of Justice, David Neal and others
Petitioner:
Innovation Law Lab
Humphrey v. Desmond et al
as 1:2023cv00726
Plaintiff:
Montay Desmond Humphrey
Defendant:
Conor P. Desmond, U.S. Department of Justice, Tax Division, United States of America and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
SANDVIK MINING AND CONSTRUCTION USA, LLC et al v. GARLAND et al
as 1:2021cv04468
Plaintiff:
Sandvik Mining and Construction USA, LLC and RODOLFO GIANCOTTI REZENDE
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, Alejandro Mayorkas, Tracy Renaud and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
YER USA, Inc. et al v. Magloire et al
as 1:2021cv04001
Plaintiff:
YER USA, Inc. and Camilla Daniels
Defendant:
Yasheka Magloire, Renata Adjibodou, Didra Goodlow and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
THOMAS et al v. MAYORKAS et al
as 1:2021cv02536
Plaintiff:
RACHEL R. THOMAS, SUMI R. THOMAS and ROMEO THOMAS
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, Tracy Renaud and Alejandro Mayorkas
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Breach et al v. Garland et al
as 1:2021cv02027
Plaintiff:
Terrance Breach, Loretta Anabui, Child one and others
Defendant:
Shineka Miller, Merrick Garland and Alejandro Mayorkas
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
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.
