Cases 21 - 30 of 36
Ferreyra v. Decker
as 20-2293
Respondent:
Acting Secretary Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Director of the New York Field Office of U.S. Immigrations & Customs Enforcement
Petitioner:
Henry Ferreyra, Rolando Oshane Villiers, Jefferson Denizard and others
Barbecho v. Decker
as 20-2207
Petitioner:
Milton Barbecho, Jose Molina, Felipe Diaz Presbot and others
Respondent:
Acting Director Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Director of the New York Field Office of U.S. Immigrations & Customs Enforcement
Genus v. Decker
as 20-2122
Respondent:
Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting 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 and William P. Barr, in his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
Petitioner:
Anthony Genus
Valenzuela Arias v. Decker
as 20-2139
Petitioner:
Edson Louis, Santo Valenzuela Arias and Job Velasquez Estrada
Defendant / Appellant:
Chad F. Wolf, Acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Director of the New York Field Office of U.S. Immigrations & Customs Enforcement
Basank v. Decker
as 20-1966
Petitioner:
Milton Barbecho, Vasif Basank, "Vincent", Job Velasquez Estrada and others
Respondent:
Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Director of the New York Field Office of U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement and Acting Secretary Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Rosemond v. Decker
as 20-1825
Respondent:
Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, Attorney General William P. Barr, n his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Acting Secretary Kevin McAleenan, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and others
Petitioner:
Jean Rosemond
Mathurin v. Barr
as 20-1810
Respondent:
Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting 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, Thomas E. Feeley, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, Buffalo Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement and others
Petitioner:
Ravely Junior Mathurin
Guerrero v. Decker
as 20-1615
Petitioner:
Domingo Guerrero
Respondent:
Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and William P. Barr, in his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
Cabanillas Lazo v. Decker
as 20-1140
Respondent:
Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, William P. Barr, in his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice and Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement
Petitioner:
Jim Marco Cabanillas Lazo
Medley v. Decker
as 20-631
Defendant / Appellant:
Chad F. Wolf, as Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, in his official capacity, Thomas Decker, as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, in his official capacity and William P. Barr, as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, in his official capacity
Plaintiff / Appellee:
Leon Leonard Medley
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.
