Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Edwardo Mathew v. Cornell Companies, Inc., et al
as 10-1182
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARDO ALEXANDRO MATHEW
Defendant - Appellee:
BRUCE CHADBOURNE, MICHAEL WEBSTER, MICHAEL CHERTOFF and others
Defendant:
DONALD WYATT DETENTION FACILITY INCORPORATED, WAYNE T. SALISBURY, JR., TIMOTHY E. TAPLEY and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 09-2369
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Mathew v. Donald Wyatt Detention Center et al
as 1:2009cv00253
Plaintiff:
Edwardo Alexandro Mathew
Defendant:
Donald Wyatt Detention Center, Wayne T. Salisbury, Timothy Tapley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Sandoval v. United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security et al
as 1:2007cv10471
Petitioner:
Carlos Enrique Avila Sandoval, Carlos Enrique Avila Sandoval, Carlos Enrique Avila Sandoval and others
Respondent:
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security and others
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105 (a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Det
Morgovsky v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al
as 1:2007cv10145
Plaintiff:
Mikhail Morgovsky
Defendant:
United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Alberto Gonzales and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Ding et al v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et al
as 1:2007cv10005
Plaintiff:
Yanhuai Ding, Chunling Zhu, Yi Ding and others
Defendant:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Robert Divine, Paul Novak and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
