Cases 41 - 50 of 109
James v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 1:2018cv03178
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Petitioner:
Desmond James
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Spears v. Federal Bureau of Prison Horizon House Re-entry Program
as 9:2018cv00313
Petitioner:
James A. Spears
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prison Horizon House Re-entry Program
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Marion v. Warden
as 18-604
Petitioner - Appellant:
Isaac Marion
Respondent:
Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons and Jefferson B. Sessions III, Attorney General
Respondent - Appellee:
D.K. Williams, Warden, FCI Danbury
Patterson v. Federal Bureau of Prison
as 1:2018cv00639
Petitioner:
Brian Patterson
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prison
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Whiteman v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 3:2018cv00037
Petitioner:
Robert J. Whiteman, Jr.
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Williams and FCI Danbury
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Patterson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 1:2017cv09646
Petitioner:
Brian Patterson
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Whiteman v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 3:2017cv01490
Petitioner:
Robert J. Whiteman, Jr.
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, FCI Danbury and Williams
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Banks v. Forbes et al
as 3:2017cv00847
Petitioner:
Frederick Banks
Respondent:
Kelly Forbes, United States Marshals Service, Mark Hornak and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Crozier v. Community Solutions, Inc. et al
as 3:2017cv00480
Petitioner:
Ralph C. Crozier
Respondent:
Community Solutions, Inc., J. Hollingworth and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Patterson v. U.S. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 1:2017cv01150
Petitioner:
Brian Patterson
Respondent:
U.S. Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
