Cases 1 - 10 of 898
Hill v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration
as 2:2025cv00257
Plaintiff:
MARY ANN HILL
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Interested Party:
General Counsel Social Security Regional Administrator - NEF Only
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Committee for A Better Arvin, et al. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al.
as 24-7270
Respondent:
MICHAEL REGAN, in his official capacity as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, MARTHA GUZMAN ACEVES, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR OF REGION 9 OF U.S., in her official capacity as Regional Administrator for Region IX of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Petitioner:
COMMITTEE FOR A BETTER ARVIN, a nonprofit corporation, NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, a nonprofit corporation, SIERRA CLUB, a nonprofit corporation and others
Little Manila Rising, et al. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency, et al.
as 24-6990
Petitioner:
MEDICAL ADVOCATES FOR HEALTHY AIR, a nonprofit corporation, LITTLE MANILA RISING, a nonprofit corporation and SIERRA CLUB, a nonprofit corporation
Respondent:
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, MARTHA GUZMAN ACEVES, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR OF REGION 9 OF U.S., in her official capacity as Regional Administrator for Region IX of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and MICHAEL REGAN, in his official capacity as Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Intervenor:
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
Little Manila Rising et al v. United States Environmental Protection Agency et al
as 4:2024cv07768
Defendant:
MICHAEL REGAN, in his official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Martha Guzman Aceves, in her official capacity as Regional Administrator for Region 9 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States Environmental Protection Agency
Plaintiff:
Sierra Club, Little Manila Rising and Medical Advocates for Healthy Air
Intervenor:
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 7604 Clear Air Act (Emission Standards)
State of Florida v. Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation, et al
as 24-13261
Defendant:
AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION INTERNATIONAL, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and others
Plaintiff:
STATE OF FLORIDA
Sierra Club v. West Virginia Coal Association
as 24-1854
Defendant:
MICHAEL S. REGAN, Regional Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, ADAM ORTIZ, Regional Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region III and UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Regional Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region III
Plaintiff:
WEST VIRGINIA HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY, INC., WEST VIRGINIA RIVERS COALITION, INC. and SIERRA CLUB
Movant:
WEST VIRGINIA COAL ASSOCIATION
Intervenor:
WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Petitioner:
ROGER GLEN HANSHAW and CRAIG BLAIR
BASTIAN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2024cv01540
Defendant:
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY COORDINATOR, CENTRAL OFFICE ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY COORDINATOR, S. HESAO and others
Plaintiff:
CASEY J. BASTIAN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Gary Wall v. E. Rasnick
as 24-6859
Defendant:
J. TESTERMAN, Correctional Officer of R.O.S.P., W. CHURCH, Lieutenant of W.R.S.P., C. BISHOP, Correctional Officer of R.O.S.P. and others
Plaintiff:
GARY WALL
Tyrell Johnson v. L. Chaffin
as 24-6858
Defendant:
FRANKS, IHO, OFFICER L. CHAFFIN, J. HUGHES, DOC Disciplinary Unit and others
Plaintiff:
TYRELL L. JOHNSON
George v. Miller et al
as 7:2024cv00604
Defendant:
C/O Smallwood, Rick White, C/O Lucas and others
Plaintiff:
Destined George
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
