Cases 1 - 10 of 101
Paez Montiel v. Garland
as 24-965
Petitioner:
VERONICA IVONNE PAEZ MONTIEL
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Petrozzi v. Inslee, et al.
as 24-689
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIMOTHY ROBERT PETROZZI
Defendant / Appellee:
JAY INSLEE, GOVERNOR, RONALD LEIGHTON, JAMES FLYNN and others
Gallardo Maldonado, et al. v. Garland
as 23-4048
Petitioner:
JESUS LEONARDO GALLARDO MALDONADO, CINDI NISSLEY ROJAS RAMIREZ, JUAN JOSE GALLARDO PAEZ and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Williams et al v. State Of New York et al
as 1:2023cv07190
Plaintiff:
Jaime Williams, Joann Ariola, David M. Carr and others
Defendant:
State Of New York, Kathy Hochul, City of New York and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Paez Plazola v. Garland
as 23-760
Petitioner:
HECTOR PAEZ PLAZOLA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Kuang-Bao Ou-Young v. USDC-CASJ
as 23-70035
Not Classified By Court:
In re: KUANG-BAO OU-YOUNG, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, JEFFREY F. ROSEN, District Attorney, County of Santa Clara and others
Petitioner:
KUANG-BAO OU-YOUNG
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE
Kuang-Bao Ou-Young v. USDC-CASJ
as 23-70016
Not Classified By Court:
In re: KUANG-BAO OU-YOUNG, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, JEFFREY F. ROSEN, District Attorney, County of Santa Clara and others
Petitioner:
KUANG-BAO OU-YOUNG
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE
Crowl et al v. Strongblock et al
as 1:2022cv07313
Plaintiff:
Erik Crowl, Keith Wade, Eric O'Reily and others
Defendant:
Strongblock, David C Moss, Brian Abramson and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77 Securities Fraud
PAEZ v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2022vv00823
Petitioner:
PATTI PAEZ
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
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.
