Cases 1 - 9 of 9
DREWS LAWN & SNOW SERVICE INC v. ACOSTA
as 3:2018cv00979
Petitioner:
DREWS LAWN & SNOW SERVICE INC
Respondent:
R ALEXANDER ACOSTA
Cause Of Action: Contempt Proceedings
Acosta v. Scott Smith Roofing, Inc. et al
as 5:2018mc00002
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Scott Smith Roofing, Inc. and Wayne Smith
Acosta v. Lovett
as 8:2017mc00090
Petitioner:
R. Alexander Acosta
Respondent:
William H. Lovett, Jr.
Cause Of Action: Administrative Subpoena
Acosta v. Al Qaderi, Inc. et al
as 8:2017mc00059
Petitioner:
R. Alexander Acosta
Respondent:
Al Qaderi, Inc. and Mujahed Elbooz
Cause Of Action: Administrative Subpoena
El-Abaidy v. Mukasey et al
as 1:2008cv22034
Plaintiff:
Usama El-Abaidy
Defendant:
Michael Mukasey, R. Alexander Acosta, Michael Chertoff and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Ficus Farm, Inc. v. United States Department of Agriculture-Risk Management Agency et al
as 9:2007cv80263
Plaintiff:
Ficus Farm, Inc., Ficus Farm, Inc. and Ficus Farm, Inc.
Defendant:
United States Department of Agriculture-Risk Management Agency, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL-WASHINGTON and R. Alexander Acosta
Cause Of Action: 07 U.S.C. § 0499 Agricultural Commodities Act
Davila v. Attorney General et al
as 1:2007cv20426
Plaintiff:
Juan Ernesto Davila
Defendant:
Attorney General, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Mohammad v. Gonzales et al
as 1:2007cv20260
Plaintiff:
Hussein Mohammad
Defendant:
Alberto Gonzales, R. Alexander Acosta, Michael Chertoff and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
v. Nazzal et al
as 1:2007cv20090
Plaintiff:
Mohamed Nazzal
Defendant:
Michael Chertoff, Robert S. Mueller, III, Emilio T. Gonzales and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
