Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Nasser v. The South Bend Clinic, LLC f/k/a The South Bend Clinic, LLP et al
as 3:2023cv00506
Plaintiff:
Naseer Nasser
Defendant:
The South Bend Clinic, LLC f/k/a The South Bend Clinic, LLP, Kelly Macken-Marble, The South Bend Clinic, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv01097
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
NASSER v. SAUL
as 2:2020cv00494
Defendant:
ANDREW M. SAUL
Plaintiff:
NANCY M. NASSER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
SOOD v. INDIANA UNIVERSITY et al
as 1:2018cv02696
Defendant:
THE INDIANA UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, JAY L. HESS and others
Plaintiff:
RAJIV SOOD, M.D.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NASSER v POLYMER TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS, INC.
as 1:2017cv02142
Plaintiff:
CONSTANCE RENEE NASSER
Defendant:
POLYMER TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
MOELLER et al v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY
as 1:2016cv00446
Defendant:
CHARLES BANTZ, BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY, KIM D KIRKLAND and others
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW C MOELLER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2015cv01478
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2009cv00062
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
NASSER AHMED v. JETT
as 2:2008cv00342
Petitioner:
AMERI NASSER AHMED
Respondent:
B. R. JETT
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
United States of America v. Farrash
as 3:2007cv00068
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Nasser Farrash
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1341 Complaint for Forfeiture
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.
