1:26-cv-01473 De La Cruz et al v. City of New York et al
Summons Returned Executed ( 43
Ramirez Villasenor v. Valdez et al is a case where the court issued an order on an ex parte application. The details of the application are not specified in the provided summary.
Latest development
Order · April 21, 2026
The court issued an order.
description View filingRamirez Villasenor v. Valdez et al, 26-cv-01473, is a federal case where the court issued an order on an ex parte application. The details of the application are not specified in the provided summary.
On April 21, 2026, the court granted a motion to seal certain documents in the case, allowing the parties to keep sensitive information confidential. The court's order and the sealed documents are part of the ongoing litigation. The case remains active, with a judge yet to be assigned.
The parties involved are Ramirez Villasenor and Valdez et al. The court's decision to seal documents suggests that the case may involve sensitive or confidential information. The next development to watch is the assignment of a judge to the case, which could provide more insight into the court's handling of the ex parte application and the sealed documents.
The court's order and the sealed documents are likely to be the focus of future filings and hearings in the case.
Order on Ex Parte Application ( 9
Open original open_in_newJuryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.
A Summons was issued.
The court issued an order.
The court granted a motion to seal certain documents in the case of Ramirez Villasenor v. Valdez et al. This decision allows the parties to keep sensitive information confidential. The sealed documents will not be publicly available.
Summons Returned Executed ( 43
Order on Ex Parte Application ( 9
Sources tracked
3 outlets · 3 articles
Timeline events
3 records on file
Last updated
23 hours, 19 minutes ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.