Cases 1 - 5 of 5
CAI v. HUDSON COUNTY CORRECTIONAL CENTER et al
as 2:2014cv00068
Plaintiff:
DONG CAI
Defendant:
HUDSON COUNTY CORRECTIONAL CENTER, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE), J. CABRERA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CAI v. MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION et al
as 3:2014cv00081
Plaintiff:
DONG CAI
Defendant:
MONMOUTH COUNTY CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION and U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (ICE)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jose Avila v. Kenneth Landgrebe, et al
as 13-20586
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JOSE MARIA VILLATORO AVILA
Defendant - Appellee:
KENNETH LANDGREBE, Director, Removal and Detentions Operations for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, GARY GOLDMAN, Chief Counsel for U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), ERIC HOLDER, Attorney General for U.S. Department of Justice and others
Fattah v. Mitra, et al
as 12-2460
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ABDEL FATTAH
Defendant - Appellee:
KELLY A. MITRA, Supervisory Detention and Deportation Office for the US Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), MARY SABOL, Warden York County Prison, THOMAS DECKER, Field Office Director, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Philadelphia Field Office and others
Isaac Kiniti, et al v. Julie Myers, et al
as 08-56677
Plaintiff - Appellee:
ANY CASTRO, JOSE MORALES-VARGAS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated and FRED NGUGI
Plaintiff - Appellant:
ISAAC KIGONDU KINITI, SYLVESTER OWINO and HERNAN ISMAEL DELGADO, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated
Defendant - Appellee:
JULIE L. MYERS, Assistant Secretary, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), GARY E. MEAD, Acting Director, Office of Detention and Removal Operations, ICE, GARY E. MEAD, Acting Director, Office of Detention and Removal Operations, ICE and others
Amicu:
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
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.
