Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01178
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv00520
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv01736
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Hmoud, et al v. City Of Cincinnati, et al
as 1:2023cv00187
Plaintiff:
ahmad hmoud and Liberty Used Tires, LLC
Defendant:
City Of Cincinnati, Sheryl Long, Emily Smart Woerner and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
INTWARI et al v. BLINKEN et al
as 1:2022cv03778
Plaintiff:
QUINTEEN ELTON INTWARI, GABY BENI HATUNGIMANA and ELOGE WILLY KANEZA
Defendant:
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, RENA BITTER, MEG WHITMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Epps v. United States of America et al
as 1:2022cv00610
Plaintiff:
Alicia A Epps
Defendant:
United States of America, Carl Lindner, III, Jeff Berding and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
A. Copeland v. Raymond Lane, et al
as 13-16251
Plaintiff - Appellant:
A. J. COPELAND, individually and derivatively on behalf of Hewlett-Packard Company
Defendant - Appellee:
RAYMOND J. LANE, GARY REINER, LEO APOTHEKER and others
Copeland v. Lane et al
as 5:2011cv01058
Plaintiff:
A. J. Copeland
Defendant:
Raymond J. Lane, Gary Reiner, Leo Apotheker and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Copeland v. Lane et al
as 3:2011cv01058
Plaintiff:
A. J. Copeland
Defendant:
Raymond J. Lane, Gary Reiner, Leo Apotheker and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Horicianu v. Ebay, Inc.
as 10-4778
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Florin Horicianu
Defendant - Appellee:
Ebay, Inc., Pierre Omidyar and Margaret Whitman, AKA Meg Whitman
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.
