Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Uhuru v. Gin, et al.
as 26-6019
Plaintiff:
KOHEN DIALLO E. UHURU
Defendant:
JASMIN GIN, Community Resource Manager, GENA JONES, CDCR Director, DAO VANG, Acting Warden at CHCF and others
Vang v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 5:2026cv00191
Plaintiff:
Naokor Vang
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Interested Party:
SSA Noticing and US Attorney-Social Security Noticing
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSDC)
Vang v. City of Fresno et al
as 1:2026cv06955
Plaintiff:
David Vang
Defendant:
City of Fresno, Andrew Janz, Erin and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
(PC) McDonald v. Newsom et al
as 2:2026cv02889
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey D. McDonald
Defendant:
Gavin Newsom, Jeff McCumber, Dao Vang and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Green v. Warden Bolen et al
as 0:2026cv03696
Plaintiff:
Rickie Green
Defendant:
Warden Bolen, Lt. Jones, Lt. Meyers and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Flores v. Vang, et al.
as 26-5302
Defendant:
JASON LOPES (Z), AMBER VANG, SACRAMENTO FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER and others
Plaintiff:
VALERIE FLORES
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv05950
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105 (a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Detainee
(PC) Bobadilla v. Vang
as 2:2026cv02615
Plaintiff:
Anthony Ivan Bobadilla
Defendant:
T. Vang
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv02642
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
(PC) Prasad v. State of California et al
as 2:2026cv02488
Plaintiff:
Kevin B. Prasad
Defendant:
State of California, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation (CDCR), California Health Care Facility Stockton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
