Cases 1 - 10 of 934
AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE et al
as 1:2024cv02602
Defendant:
U.S. CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION SERVICES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE and U.S. IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT
Plaintiff:
AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY FOUNDATION
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-12360
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv05709
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 4:2024cv03140
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv05648
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv06610
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Chen v. Mayorkas
as 24-2058
Defendant:
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, in his official capacity as Secretary of Department of Homeland Security and UR M. JADDOU, in her official capacity as Director of U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services
Plaintiff:
BAOMING CHEN
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv22910
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv05712
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv04391
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
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.
