Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Jakub Kalas v. Chad Wolf
as 20-1408
Respondent:
CHAD F. WOLF, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security
Petitioner:
JAKUB KALAS
Vincenza Presti v. DHS, et al
as 20-1397
Plaintiff / Appellant:
VINCENZA PRESTI
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, CHAD F. WOLF and CHAD F. WOLF, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security
Jakub Kalas v. Chad F. Wolf
as 19-3275
Respondent:
CHAD F. WOLF, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security
Petitioner:
JAKUB KALAS
Manpreet Singh v. Kevin K. McAleenan, et al
as 19-2224
Respondent:
JOSE L. ZAMORA, Director, Chicago Field Office, WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General of the United States, DAMON ACUFF, Warden, Pulaski County Detention Center and others
Petitioner:
MANPREET SINGH
Peter Nebus v. Jefferson B. Sessions III
as 17-2672
Petitioner:
PETER NEBUS
Respondent:
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General of the United States, JOHN F. KELLY, Secretary of Homeland Security, ELAINE C. DUKE, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security and others
John Doe v. John F. Kelly, et al
as 17-2040
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOHN DOE
Defendant - Appellee:
JEH C. JOHNSON, Secretary of Homeland Security, JOHN F. KELLY, Secretary of Homeland Security, LEON RODRIGUEZ, Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and others
Jose Guardado-Reveles v. Ricardo Wong, et al
as 12-1620
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOSE GUARDADO-REVELES, #A091-333-832
Respondent - Appellee:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General of the United States, JANET A. NAPOLITANO, Secretary of Homeland Security and RICARDO WONG, Field Office Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Fidel Meraz-Nunez v. Janet Napolitano
as 11-1224
Petitioner:
FIDEL MERAZ-NUNEZ
Respondent:
JANET A. NAPOLITANO, Secretary of Homeland Security
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 08-3283
Petitioner - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
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.
