Cases 21 - 30 of 805
Caraffa v. Unknown Leon, et al.
as 24-681
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALFRED ERIK CARAFFA
Defendant / Appellee:
UNKNOWN LEON, c/o mail/property officer at Rincon, UNKNOWN RAMOS, housing unit 5 correctional officer, UNKNOWN PARTIES, named as unknown unlawful employees of ASPC- Tucson and others
McGee v. State of California, et al.
as 24-393
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JEFFERSON A. MCGEE
Defendant / Appellee:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA, ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER and others
Melchor-Ramos, et al. v. Garland
as 24-223
Petitioner:
ROFINO MELCHOR-RAMOS, LISSETH SOTO-CUYAMANI, SCARLETT MELCHOR-SOTO and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Martins, et al. v. Garland
as 24-86
Petitioner:
REGINALDO MARTINS, YASMIN RAMOS MARTINS, FABIANA PEREIRA RAMOS MARTINS and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Reyes De Ramos, et al. v. Garland
as 23-4391
Petitioner:
ALEXANDRA REYES DE RAMOS, GERARDO RAMOS REYES, ISABEL RAMOS REYES and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Melchor-Ramos, et al. v. Garland
as 23-4265
Petitioner:
ANA MELCHOR-RAMOS and KELLER ESCOBAR-MELCHOR
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Kimberly Scott et al v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
as 2:2023cv01906
Plaintiff:
Kimberly Scott, Robin Warbey, Jacob Davis and others
Defendant:
Costco Wholesale Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract
Ruiz Ramos, et al. v. Garland
as 23-3834
Petitioner:
JULIA MARINA RUIZ RAMOS and CHELSEY YAHAIRA FELIPE RUIZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Ramos-Ramos, et al. v. Garland
as 23-3774
Petitioner:
ERICA RAMOS-RAMOS, SARA LUPITA CARRILLO-RAMOS and SANTA ROSA CARRILLO-RAMOS
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Alvarez Ramos v. Garland
as 23-3725
Petitioner:
JOSE ANTONIO ALVAREZ RAMOS
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
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.
