District Court Cases in District of Columbia
Cases 11 - 20 of 57,398
Htet v. BIDEN et al
as 1:2024cv01446
Plaintiff:
Theint Win Htet
Defendant:
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JANET YELLEN, BRADLEY T. SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0706 Judicial Review of Agency Actions
MAYO v. USA
as 1:2024cv01430
Petitioner:
DECONDI DANTE MAYO
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01404
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
AHMED v. BLINKEN et al
as 1:2024cv01407
Plaintiff:
AHMED MOHAMED SALEM M AHMED
Defendant:
ANTONY J. BLINKEN, RENA BITTER, EVYENIA SIDEREAS and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01405
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01412
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0706 Judicial Review of Agency Actions
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01401
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
GRAY et al v. RAIMONDO et al
as 1:2024cv01431
Plaintiff:
TILMAN GRAY doing business as AVON SEAFOOD and SLASH CREEK WATERWORKS, INC.
Defendant:
GINA M. RAIMONDO and NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
MAJORS v. MCDONOUGH
as 1:2024cv01433
Plaintiff:
DARRYL MAJORS
Defendant:
DENIS MCDONOUGH
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 754 Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv01432
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1401 Education: Handicapped Child 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.
