Cases 1 - 10 of 65
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00280
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Sardar Ashrafkhan v. USA
as 24-1019
Petitioner:
SARDAR ASHRAFKHAN, aka Sardar Khan, (Dr. Khan)
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2023cv01625
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2023cv01623
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv03081
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01442
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv05252
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
MIA et al v. KIMBERLY CLARK CORPORATION et al
as 1:2022cv02353
Plaintiff:
MOHAMMED FORHAD MIA, BILLAL, JAKER HOSSEN and others
Not Classified By Court:
MOHAMMED SHA ALAM SARKER
Defendant:
KIMBERLY CLARK CORPORATION, ANSELL CORPORATION, ANSELL HEALTHCARE PRODUCTS LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
Ashrafkhan v. USA
as 2:2021cv13062
Petitioner:
Sardar Ashrafkhan
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Barnett v. Day & Night Trucking, Inc. et al
as 6:2021cv00176
Defendant:
Standard Transfer, Inc., Sardar Khan and Day & Night Trucking, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Bindhi Barnett
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
