Cases 1 - 10 of 297
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv04791
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv01475
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
RAG Process, LLC v. Garland et al
as 4:2021cv04048
Plaintiff:
RAG Process, LLC
Defendant:
Merrick Garland, Alejandro Mayorkas, Rosemary Melville and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
PATEL v. GARLAND et al
as 1:2021cv02892
Plaintiff:
Parthkumar Rakeshkumar Patel
Not Classified By Court:
Director UR MENDOZA JADDOU and Field Director RUTH DOROCHOFF
Defendant:
US Attorney General MERRICK GARLAND, Secretary ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Acting Director ROSEMARY MELVILLE and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv00969
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Raven Software Solutions Inc v. USCIS et al
as 3:2021cv02212
Plaintiff:
Raven Software Solutions Inc
Defendant:
USCIS, Ur M Jaddou, Rosemary Melville and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 7422
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2021cv04304
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Mirsad Hajro, et al v. USCIS, et al
as 17-15984
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MIRSAD HAJRO and JAMES R. MAYOCK
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, T. DIANE CEJKA, Director, USCIS National Records Center, ROSEMARY MELVILLE, USCIS District Director of San Francisco and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 16-3265
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv02612
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
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.
