Cases 81 - 90 of 371
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2021cv06243
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01376
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1446
Rodriguez Palacios v. Garland
as 21-6143
Petitioner:
ANA ISABEL RODRIGUEZ PALACIOS
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL and ROBERT M. WILKINSON, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Godoy-Arana v. Garland
as 21-6142
Petitioner:
MERCEDES ROBERTO GODOY-ARANA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, ROBERT M. WILKINSON, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL and EOIR CAR FILING
Sanchez-Regalado v. Garland
as 21-6139
Petitioner:
JORGE LUIS SANCHEZ-REGALADO and HEIDY CAROLINA SANCHEZ-REGALADO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL and ROBERT M. WILKINSON, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Singh v. Garland
as 21-6141
Petitioner:
VIJAY SINGH
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL and ROBERT M. WILKINSON, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Abdelwahab v. Garland
as 21-6138
Petitioner:
MOHAMED AHMED ABDELWAHAB
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL and ROBERT M. WILKINSON, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Rasel et al v. Texas Service Center et al
as 1:2021cv01332
Respondent:
Jane Does 1-10, ABC Agency 1-10, Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas and others
Petitioner:
Nour Mohammad Rasel and Afroza Akter
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Abdelwahab v. Garland
as 21-6136
Petitioner:
MOHAMED AHMED ABDELWAHAB
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL and ROBERT M. WILKINSON, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01321
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
