Cases 11 - 20 of 14,829
Romero-Regalado v. Garland
as 24-1293
Petitioner:
MARIA VANESA ROMERO-REGALADO and ADRIAN SAMUEL ROMERO-REGALADO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Brian Firebaugh, et al v. Merrick Garland
as 24-1130
Petitioner:
Brian Firebaugh, Chloe Joy Sexton, Talia Cadet and others
Respondent:
Merrick B. Garland, in his capacity as United States Attorney General
Jones v. O'Malley
as 5:2024cv00035
Plaintiff:
Kemoa Jones
Defendant:
Martin J. O'Malley
Interested Party:
Social Security Administration and United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Georgia
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Larry Johnson, Sr. v. Lee Coffee, et al
as 24-5468
Plaintiff:
LARRY D. JOHNSON, SR.
Defendant:
LEE V. COFFEE, Assistant District Attorney (former). In individual and official capacity., ARTHUR THOMAS BENNETT, Judge Criminal Court. In individual and official capacity., GWENDOLYN ROOKS, General Sessions Court Judge. Individual capacity and others
Singh v. Garland
as 24-1291
Petitioner:
LOVEJEET SINGH
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Lobato Quito v. Garland
as 24-1297
Petitioner:
MILTON WLADIMIR LOBATO QUITO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Tola-Beltran v. Garland
as 24-1295
Petitioner:
MIRLA PATRICIA TOLA-BELTRAN
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Jean-Baptiste v. United States Department of Justice
as 24-1299
Plaintiff:
HAROLD JEAN-BAPTISTE
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Ahmed v. Garland
as 24-1284
Petitioner:
MOHAMMAD SHAMIM AHMED, RUJY BEGUM and SAMIRA BEGUM
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Ham-Pena v. Garland
as 24-1287
Petitioner:
CARLOS ALBERTO HAM-PENA
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.
