Cases 21 - 30 of 50
Golden Skyway Inc v. United States of America et al
as 2:2013cv09106
Petitioner:
Golden Skyway Inc
Respondent:
United States Customs and Border Protection, United States Secret Service and United States of America
Fitzsimmons v. United States Secret Service et al
as 4:2013cv04299
Plaintiff:
Erin Fitzsimmons
Defendant:
United States Secret Service and United States Department Health and Human Services
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Renjoir v. White House et al
as 2:2013cv01277
Plaintiff:
William Renjoir
Defendant:
White House, United States Secret Service, Donald Rumsfeld and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Tyrone Hurt v. United States Secret Service, et al
as 12-15919
Plaintiff - Appellant:
TYRONE HURT
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE and STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A blue in color ASUS Vento 3600 computer tower, seized from 8139 Bradwell Ave., Whittier, CA on or about April 10, 2008, and in the custody of the United States Secret Service, Los Angeles, CA
as 2:2011mj00781
Defendant:
A blue in color ASUS Vento 3600 computer tower, seized from 8139 Bradwell Ave., Whittier, CA on or about April 10, 2008, and in the custody of the United States Secret Service, Los Angeles, CA (1)
Plaintiff:
USA
USA v. A blue in color ASUS Vento 3600 computer tower, seized from 8139 Bradwell Ave., Whittier, CA on or about April 10, 2008, and in the custody of the United States Secret Service, Los Angeles, CA
as 2:2011mj00781
Defendant:
A blue in color ASUS Vento 3600 computer tower, seized from 8139 Bradwell Ave., Whittier, CA on or about April 10, 2008, and in the custody of the United States Secret Service, Los Angeles, CA (1)
Plaintiff:
USA
USA v. Digital Devices, seized on May 27,2010, and currently in the custody of the United States Secret Service at 725 S. Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, California
as 2:2011mj00058
Defendant:
Digital Devices, seized on may 27,2010, and currently in the custody of the United States Secret Service at 725 S. Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, California (1)
Plaintiff:
USA
Digital Devices, seized on may 27,2010, and currently in the custody of the United States Secret Service at 725 S. Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, California
as 2:2011mj00058
Defendant:
Digital Devices, seized on may 27,2010, and currently in the custody of the United States Secret Service at 725 S. Figueroa Street, Los Angeles, California (1)
Plaintiff:
USA
Michael Moss, et al v. Tim Wood, et al
as 10-36172
Plaintiff - Appellee:
MICHAEL MOSS, LESLEY ADAMS, BETH WILCOX and others
Defendant:
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, of the Department of Homeland Security, RALPH BASHAM, Former Director of the United States Secret Service, in his individual capacity, JOHN DOE, 1, United States Secret Service Agent, in his official and individual capacities, participating in these actions and known to the Defendant Secret Service, but unknown at this time to Plaintiffs and others
Defendant - Appellant:
TIM WOOD, United States Secret Service Agent, in his official and individual capacities and ROB SAVAGE, United States Secret Service Agent, in his official and individual capacities
Michael Moss, et al v. Ron Ruecker, et al
as 10-36152
Plaintiff - Appellee:
MICHAEL MOSS, LESLEY ADAMS, BETH WILCOX and others
Defendant:
UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE, of the Department of Homeland Security, RALPH BASHAM, Former Director of the United States Secret Service, in his individual capacity, TIM WOOD, United States Secret Service Agent, in his official and individual capacities and others
Defendant - Appellant:
RON RUECKER, Superintendent of the Oregon State Police, in his official and individual capacities, ERIC RODRIQUEZ, former Captain of the Southwest Regional Headquarters of the Oregon State Police, in his official and individual capacities, TIM F. MCCLAIN, Superintendent of the Oregon State Police, in his official capacity and others
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.
