Cases 1 - 10 of 27
Our Children's Earth Foundation et al v. Regan et al
as 3:2024cv00286
Plaintiff:
Our Children's Earth Foundation and Ecological Rights Foundation
Defendant:
Michael S. Regan, Martha Guzman and United States Environmental Protection Agency
Cause Of Action: 33 U.S.C. § 1365 Environmental Matters
Arizona Mining Reform Coalition et al v. Guzman et al
as 2:2023cv02038
Plaintiff:
Arizona Mining Reform Coalition, Center for Biological Diversity, Earthworks and others
Defendant:
Martha Guzman, United States Environmental Protection Agency and Michael Regan
Cause Of Action: 33 U.S.C. § 1365 Environmental Matters
East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice et al v. United States Environmental Protection Agency et al
as 4:2023cv04448
Plaintiff:
East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, People's Collective for Environmental Justice, Sierra Club and others
Defendant:
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Michael Regan, in his official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Martha Guzman, in her official capacity as Regional Administrator for Region 9 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 7604 Clear Air Act (Emission Standards)
Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency et al
as 4:2023cv03571
Plaintiff:
Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice
Defendant:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Michael Regan and Martha Guzman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 7604 Clear Air Act (Emission Standards)
Panoche Energy Center, LLC v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al.
as 23-1268
Petitioner:
PANOCHE ENERGY CENTER, LLC
Respondent:
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, MICHAEL S. REGAN, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and MARTHA GUZMAN ACEVES, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR OF REGION 9 OF U.S.
Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency et al
as 4:2022cv04191
Plaintiff:
Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice
Defendant:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Michael Regan and Martha Guzman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 7604 Clear Air Act (Emission Standards)
ASARCO, LLC v. USEPA, et al
as 22-70058
Petitioner / Appellant:
ASARCO, LLC
Respondent / Appellee:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and MARTHA GUZMAN, Regional Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9
National Lifeline Association v. Marybel Batjer, et al
as 21-15969
Plaintiff / Appellee:
NATIONAL LIFELINE ASSOCIATION
Defendant / Appellant:
GENEVIEVE SHIROMA, in her official capacity as a commissioner of the California Public Utilities Commission, MARYBEL BATJER, in her official capacity as a commissioner of the California Public Utilities Commission, LIANE RANDOLPH, in her official capacity as a commissioner of the California Public Utilities Commission and others
S. Mendel v. Liane Randolph, et al
as 21-15910
Defendant:
ELAINE L. CHAO, in her official capacity as U.S. Secretary of Transportation, ANNE KRAMER, Attorney of the law firm Lichten & Liss-Riordan, P.C., MICHAEL PICKER, in his individual and official capacity as President, Commissioner, California Public Utilities Commission and others
Defendant / Appellee:
CLIFFORD RECHTSCHFFEN, in his indiviual and official capacity as Commissioner, California Public Utilities Commission, UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., MARITZA PEREZ, in her individual and official capacity as Section Supervisor Badge #11 Transportationb License Section California Public Utilities Commission and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
S. PATRICK MENDEL
National Lifeline Association v. Batjer et al
as 3:2020cv08312
Defendant:
Liane M. Randolph, Martha Guzman Aceves, Clifford Rechtschaffen and others
Plaintiff:
National Lifeline Association
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
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.
