Cases 41 - 50 of 114
PALMA-RODRIGUEZ v. WARDEN
as 3:2017cv00145
Petitioner:
DANIEL PALMA-RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Palma-Rodriguez v. Warden
as 3:2017cv01384
Petitioner:
Daniel Palma-Rodriguez
Respondent:
Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
RODRIGUEZ v. BRADLEY et al
as 3:2017cv00107
Petitioner:
JUAN B. RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
E. BRADLEY and FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
RODRIGUEZ v. MAHALLY et al
as 2:2017cv02160
Petitioner:
LUIS RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
LAWRENCE MAHALLY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
J.M.V.R. et al v. KELLY et al
as 5:2017cv00703
Petitioner:
J.M.V.R. and ELSA MILAGROS RODRIGUEZ GARCIA
Respondent:
JOHN F. KELLY, JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, THOMAS D. HOMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
RODRIGUEZ v. MAY et al
as 2:2016cv05353
Petitioner:
JUAN RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, CHESTER COUNTY and BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ANTONETTY-RODRIGUEZ v. GIROUX
as 5:2016cv01930
Petitioner:
JAVIER ANTONETTY-RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
NANCY GIROUX, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF READING, PA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
RODRIGUEZ v. MILLION
as 3:2016cv00070
Petitioner:
LUIS RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
SEAN MILLION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
CEBALLOS-QUINTANILLA et al v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ("DHS") et al
as 5:2016cv00118
Petitioner:
FANY YAKELIN CEBALLOS-QUINTANILLA and L.Y.T.C.
Respondent:
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ("DHS"), U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION ("CBP"), U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES ("USCIS") and others
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105
RODRIGUEZ v. WARDEN KUTA
as 3:2015cv00337
Petitioner:
EDISON RODRIGUEZ
Respondent:
WARDEN KUTA
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.
