Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02343
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv02854
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552 Freedom of Information Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv03113
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in - Habeas Corpus: INS
Galindo v. OCAHO
as 20-9601
Respondent:
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER, EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
Petitioner:
AURELIO GALINDO
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv00078
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv00538
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Mesa-Barria et al v. United States of America President et al
as 2:2013cv00221
Plaintiff:
Elias Enoc Mesa-Barria and Connie Howell-Mesa
Defendant:
United States of America President, United States Attorney General, United States Executive Office of Immigration Review Board Member and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Diaz-Holguin v. Holder, Jr.
as 09-9513
Petitioner:
DIMAS ARMANDO DIAZ-HOLGUIN
Respondent:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Untied States Attorney General, JANET NAPOLITANO, United States Department of Homeland Security Secretary and THOMAS G. SNOW, Executive Office for Immigration Review Acting Director
Ferry v. Webber, et al
as 05-1014
Petitioner - Appellant:
CIARAN FERRY
Respondent - Appellee:
SCOTT WEBBER, Director of Bureau of Inspections and Customs Enforcement, PETER D. KEISLER, Attorney General of the United States of America, TOM RIDGE, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and others
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.
