Jorge Barajas v. M. Bowen
Petitioner: Jorge Barajas
Respondent: M. Bowen
Case Number: 2:2016cv04703
Filed: June 28, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Manuel L. Real
Presiding Judge: Patrick J. Walsh
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 14, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 15 JUDGMENT by Magistrate Judge Patrick J. Walsh. Pursuant to the Order Vacating Order Requiring Response and Dismissing Second or Successive Habeas Corpus Petition, IT IS ADJUDGED that the Petition is denied and this action is dismissed with prejudice. Related to: Order, 14 (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (sbou)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Jorge Barajas v. M. Bowen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Jorge Barajas
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: M. Bowen
Represented By: Toni R Johns Estaville
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?