Cases 71 - 80 of 106
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv03501
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
PATEL v. GONZALES et al
as 2:2007cv03516
Plaintiff:
KRISHNAKANT D. PATEL
Defendant:
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, MICHAEL CHERTOFF, EMILIO T. GONZALEZS and others
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing
CHALAMACHARLA v. MUELLER et al
as 3:2007cv03382
Plaintiff:
SREENIVAS ACHARYULU CHALAMACHARLA
Defendant:
ROBERT S. MUELLER, III and ALBERTO R. GONZALES
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2007cv03229
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
PATEL v. MUELLER et al
as 2:2007cv02853
Plaintiff:
SANDEEP PATEL
Defendant:
ROBERT S. MUELLER, III, UNKNOWN U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY OR AGENCIES, MICHEAL CHERTOFF and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgement
ARIF v. OWEN et al
as 2:2007cv02786
Petitioner:
RAJA MOHAMED ARIF
Respondent:
RUSSELL OWEN, EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, MICHAEL CHERTOFF and others
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2007cv02709
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
LI v. GONZALES et al
as 3:2007cv02577
Plaintiff:
WENLI LI
Defendant:
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, MICHAEL CHERTOFF, EMILIO T. GONZALEZ and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2007cv02408
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2007cv02333
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
