Other Statutes Cases filed in the Second Circuit Courts
Cases 51 - 60 of 204
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
Fitzsimmons, Nunn & Plukas, LLP v. US Immigration and Customs Enforcement et al
as 6:2020cv07009
Plaintiff: Fitzsimmons, Nunn & Plukas, LLP
Defendant: US Immigration and Customs Enforcement and US Department of Homeland Security
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552
Knight First Amendment Institu v. United States Department of Ho We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 20-3837
Defendant: United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Customs and Border Protection and United States Department of Justice
Plaintiff / Appellee: Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University
Defendant / Appellant: United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and United States Department of State
Mohammed-Bhola v. Barr
as 20-3748
Respondent: William P. Barr, United States Attorney General, Jeffrey J. Searls, cility Director, Buffalo Federal Detention Facility and Thomas E. Feeley, Field Office Director for Detention and Removal, Buffalo Field Office, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Petitioner: Shahfeez Mohammed-Bhola
Onosamba-Ohindo v. Barr
as 20-3712
Defendant / Appellant: Jeffrey Searls, in his official capacity as the Acting Administrator of the Buffalo Federal Detention Facility
Defendant: Matthew Albence, in his official capacity as Deputy Director and Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Executive Office For Immigration Review, James McHenry, in his official capacity as the Director of the Executive Office for Immigration and others
Plaintiff / Appellee: Antonio Lopez Agustin, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated and Junior Onosamba-Ohindo, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Bernal Gutierrez v. Decker
as 20-3531
Respondent: Director Thomas Decker, New York Field Office of U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, Carl E. Du Bois, Sheriff of Orange County, Chad F. Wolf, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and others
Petitioner: Juan Edgar Bernal Gutierrez
Santos Abreu v. Barr
as 20-3391
Respondent: Thomas Feeley, Field Office Director for Dentention and Removal, Buffalo Field Office, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Jeffrey Searls, Facility Acting Director Buffalo Federal Detention Facility and William P. Barr, United States Attorney General
Petitioner: Jose Frank Santos Abreu
De La Rosa v. Barr
as 20-3398
Petitioner: Wander Duran De La Rosa
Respondent: William P. Barr, United States Attorney General, Jeffrey Searls, Facility Director, Buffalo Federal Detention Facility and Thomas Feeley, Field Director for Detention and Removal, Buffalo Field Office, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Black v. Decker
as 20-3224
Respondent: Sheriff Carl E. Dubois, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Orange County, New York, Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Director of New York Field Office of U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement and Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Petitioner: Carol Williams Black
Charpentier et al v. Department Of Homeland Security et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2020cv07510
Plaintiff: Pascal Charpentier, Marlene Deetjen Smith and Eduoard Charpentier
Defendant: United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of State and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 552

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.


Why Is My Information Online?