Cases 1 - 10 of 2,303
Siqueiros-Valenzuela v. Garland
as 24-2690
Petitioner:
KAREN JOSEFINA SIQUEIROS-VALENZUELA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
United States of America v. Valenzuela
as 24-2618
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
STEVEN ZACK VALENZUELA
Aguilera Diaz et al v. Svihel et al
as 0:2024cv01483
Plaintiff:
Allan Juseth Aguilera Diaz, Nahun Alexander Barahona Amador, Jerson Ariel Betanco Flores and others
Defendant:
John J. Svihel and Svihel Vegetable Farms, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1595 Civil Remedies: Human Trafficking
Watford et al v. The 3M Company et al
as 1:2024cv03085
Plaintiff:
Joseph Watford, Kenneth Vaughan, Greg Vanhooser and others
Defendant:
The 3M Company, AGC Chemicals Americas Inc., Amerex Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 nr Notice of Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00760
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Valenzuela v. Ghost City Tours of Texas, LLC. et al
as 5:2024cv00402
Plaintiff:
JoAnn Valenzuela
Defendant:
Ghost City Tours of Texas, LLC. and Ghost City Tours Holding, LLC.
Tom Hensiek, et al v. Board of Directors of Casino Queen Holding Company, et al
as 24-1603
Plaintiff:
TOM HENSIEK, JASON GILL and LILLIAN WROBEL
Defendant:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CASINO QUEEN HOLDING COMPANY, INC., CHARLES BIDWILL, III, JAMES G. KOMAN and others
Valenzuela (PS) v. No Named Defendant
as 1:2024cv00939
Plaintiff:
Heather Valenzuela
Defendant:
No Named Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Valenzuela v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2024cv01217
Plaintiff:
Irene Valenzuela
Defendant:
3M Company and Arizant Healthcare, Inc.
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00773
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
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.
