Cases 41 - 50 of 207
Guodoy Arana v. Decker
as 21-296
Respondent:
Alejandro Mayorkas, in his official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, Robert M. Wilkinson, in his official capacity as Acting Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice and others
Petitioner:
Mercedes Guodoy Arana
Vazquez Perez v. Decker
as 21-319
Respondent / Appellee:
Robert M. Wilkinson, in his official capacity as Acting Attorney General of the United States, United States Department of Justice, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others
Petitioner / Appellant:
Uriel Vazquez Perez, on his own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated
Rodriguez v. Garland
as 21-272
Respondent / Appellee:
Thomas E. Feeley, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, Buffalo Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, Alejandro Mayorkas, in his official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Jeffrey Searls, in his official capacity as Acting Assistant Field Office Director and Administrator, Buffalo Federal Detention Facility and others
Petitioner / Appellant:
Nelson Sosa Rodriguez
Vazquez Perez v. Decker
as 21-192
Respondent:
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Robert M. Wilkinson, in his official capacity as Acting Attorney General of the United States, United States Department of Justice and others
Petitioner:
Uriel Vazquez Perez, on his own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated
Hylton v. Decker
as 21-145
Respondent:
Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, Acting Secretary Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Acting Attorney General Monty Wilkinson, in his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice and others
Petitioner:
Gabrae Hylton
Donnelly v. Controlled Application Review
as 20-4243
Respondent / Appellee:
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Jeffrey A. Rosen, Acting United States Attorney General, L. Francis Cissna, Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and others
Petitioner / Appellant:
Mr. Patrick J. Donnelly
Salim Adrianza v. Biden
as 20-4165
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Blanca Danelia Funes Castellano, individually and as next friend to Emma Obando Funes, A.Y.B.O, and J.L.B.O., Emma Obando Funes, Amin Naim Salim Adrianza, individually and as next friend to Leimariana del Valle Petit Romero and others
Defendant / Appellee:
United States Department of Homeland Security, Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States, Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Homeland Security and others
Nazer v. United States of America
as 20-4021
Defendant / Appellee:
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Izzat Nazer
Hernandez-Aviles v. Decker
as 20-3995
Petitioner:
Noe Hernandez-Aviles
Respondent:
Attorney General William P. Barr, in his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Acting Secretary Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Thomas v. Barr
as 20-4029
Respondent:
Thomas Brophy, Facility Director Buffalo Federal Detention Facility, Thomas E. Feeley, Field Office Director for Detention and Removal, Buffalo Field Office, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, William P. Barr, Attorney General of the United States and others
Petitioner:
Harvel Thomas
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.
