Cases 1 - 10 of 14,526
Kansas, State of et al v. United States Attorney General et al
as 2:2024cv00088
Plaintiff:
Kansas, State of, Arkansas, State of, Iowa, State of and others
Defendant:
United States Attorney General, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and United States Department of Justice
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. ยง 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Rivera-Cruz v. Garland
as 24-1146
Petitioner:
JENNIFER RIVERA-CRUZ and KEYSHA CRUZ-RIVERA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Gomes Calixto v. Garland
as 24-1151
Petitioner:
NACIPE GOMES CALIXTO, JULIANA DA SILVA GUEDES and MARIA ALICE GUEDES CALIXTO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Rodriguez-Novoa v. Garland
as 24-1153
Petitioner:
DIGNA DEL CARMEN RODRIGUEZ-NOVOA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Chacon Ovalle v. Garland
as 24-9530
Petitioner:
LIDIA GUISE CHACON OVALLE
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General
Monjarrez-Hernandez v. Garland
as 24-1130
Petitioner:
BELINDA ARACELY MONJARREZ-HERNANDEZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Rodas Villatoro v. Garland
as 24-1136
Petitioner:
MARITZA ISAMAR RODAS VILLATORO, ALEXIS JOSIMAR VILLATORO RODAS and DAMARIS LISBETH VILLATORO RODAS
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
James v. Garland
as 24-1120
Petitioner:
DONALD WINSTON JAMES
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Lema-Tenesaca v. Garland
as 24-1118
Petitioner:
MARTIN SEBASTIAN LEMA-TENESACA, CARLA DANIELA QUIZHPI-FAICAN and DOMENICA ISABELLA LEMA-QUIZHPI
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Sanchez-Portillo v. Garland
as 24-1117
Petitioner:
CRISTIAN SANCHEZ-PORTILLO, KAREN YANES-SANTOS, ZOE MATUTE-YANES and others
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES 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.
