Cases 61 - 70 of 484
Flores v. USA
as 2:2022cv00542
Petitioner:
Ruben Flores
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Reeder v. USA
as 2:2022cv00533
Petitioner:
Zachary Stephen Reeder
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Cordova v. USA
as 2:2022cv00479
Petitioner:
Anthony Cordova
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Hohmann v. USA
as 1:2022cv00410
Petitioner:
Tommy Hohmann
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Martinez v. USA
as 1:2022cv00407
Petitioner:
Albert Martinez
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Wilmington Savings Fund Society v. McCafferty et al
as 1:2022cv00380
Plaintiff:
Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB as Owner of Trustee of the Residential Credit Opportunities Trust VII-A and Wilmington Savings Fund Society
Defendant:
Robin M. McCafferty, Citibank, N.A., Capital One Bank (USA) N.A. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Ponce v. USA
as 1:2022cv00347
Petitioner:
Michael Ponce
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Corley v. USA
as 1:2022cv00335
Petitioner:
Nathan Corley
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Gilbert v. USA
as 1:2022cv00282
Petitioner:
Miranda Gilbert
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Eddy County v. Allergan PLC et al
as 2:2022cv00140
Plaintiff:
Eddy County
Defendant:
Allergan PLC f/k/a Actavis PLC, Allergan Finance LLC f/k/a Actavis, Inc. f/k/a Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Allergan Sales, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) 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.
