Cases 1 - 10 of 524
Dowell v. Kobayashi
as 24-20201
Plaintiff:
Matthew Scott Dowell
Defendant:
Warden H. Kobayashi, FDC Warden, Lieutenant Standley, Special Housing Unit Lieutenant, Lieutenant Brown, Lieutenant at FDC and others
Havens v. Pearson et al
as 2:2024cv00096
Plaintiff:
Christopher Dale Havens
Defendant:
Heather Pearson, Vanmetter, Stevenson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jesus Zarate v. Merrick Garland
as 24-3307
Petitioner:
JESUS IGNACIO ZARATE
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Zarate v. USA
as 3:2024cv00804
Petitioner:
Ricardo Hernandez Zarate
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Zarate-Preciado v. Garland
as 24-1664
Petitioner:
J JESUS ZARATE-PRECIADO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Zarate v. Coger et al
as 5:2024cv00278
Plaintiff:
Isaac Zarate
Defendant:
Warden FNU Coger, Warden FNU Gould, Warden FNU Feazel and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company v. H&A EMR, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv01390
Plaintiff:
Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company
Defendant:
H&A EMR, LLC, Adam Dorosheff, Hannah Van and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgement
Regency West Enterprises, LLC v. Miguel Zarate et al
as 8:2024cv00324
Plaintiff:
Regency West Enterprises, LLC
Defendant:
Miguel Valenzuela Zarate, Esther Garcia, Josue Acosta and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00094
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrim
Zarate-Hernandez v. Maldonaldo et al
as 4:2023cv00092
Plaintiff:
LUIS ZARATE-HERNANDEZ
Defendant:
LUIS PEREZ MALDONALDO, BARR-NUNN TRANSPORTATION, LLC, Luis Perez Maldonado and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
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.
