Cases 1 - 10 of 30
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00254
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 7703 Discrimination - Review of Agency Act
TURPIN et al v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al
as 1:2022cv01807
Plaintiff:
CHARLES TURPIN and REGINA JACKSON
Defendant:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA and MICHAEL CHEN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Pajarillo v. Schuler-Hintz et al
as 2:2022cv00664
Plaintiff:
Fidel H. Pajarillo
Defendant:
Kristin A. Schuler-Hintz, Michael Chen, U.S. Bank National Association and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Interpleader Action
Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. v. Topcon Medical Systems, Inc.
as 21-1839
Defendant:
MICHAEL CHEN, JOSEPH CICCANESI, TERRY KEITH BROCK and others
Defendant / Appellant:
TOBIAS KURZKE, TOPCON MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. and TOPCON HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONS, INC.
Plaintiff / Appellee:
CARL ZEISS MEDITEC, INC.
Wang v. Ren
as 20-4216
Defendant / Appellee:
Haiying Ren, AKA Michael Ren, AKA Michael Chen
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Ming En Wang, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated
Chen v. City & County of San Francisco et al
as 4:2020cv05578
Defendant:
City & County of San Francisco and San Francisco Police Officers Does 1-25
Plaintiff:
Michael Chen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343
Gause v. Murray et al
as 3:2019cv00341
Defendant:
R. Andrew Murray, Michael Chen, Glen Cole and others
Plaintiff:
Walter T. Gause, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Wang v. Ren
as 1:2019cv05310
Defendant:
HAIYING REN, MICHAEL CHEN and MICHAEL REN
Plaintiff:
MING EN WANG
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Chen v. Waverly Eastern Brooklyn Inc. et al
as 1:2019cv01644
Defendant:
Michael Chen, Waverly Eastern Brooklyn Inc. and Liab O Cheng
Plaintiff:
Yi Chen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Christopher Chuang v. Michael Chen et al
as 2:2019cv01478
Defendant:
Michael Chen and Wei Wen
Plaintiff:
Christopher Chuang
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1109
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.
