Cases 21 - 30 of 3,018
SHEHADEH v. USP TERRE HAUTE WARDEN
as 2:2024cv00151
Petitioner:
JAMAL SHEHADEH
Respondent:
USP TERRE HAUTE WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Bailey v. Warden, FCC Coleman USP 1
as 5:2024cv00197
Petitioner:
Deon Anthony Romell Bailey
Respondent:
Warden, FCC Coleman USP 1
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Goodwin v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 4:2024cv00273
Plaintiff:
Joe Lewis Goodwin
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and USP Leavenworth
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Thompson v. USP Leavenworth
as 5:2024cv03056
Plaintiff:
Kyle M. Thompson
Defendant:
USP Leavenworth
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Dixon v. USP Big Sandy
as 7:2024cv00033
Petitioner:
Lenard Chauncy Dixon
Respondent:
Warden, USP Big Sandy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Shields v. Warden of USP Lee County
as 7:2024cv00169
Petitioner:
Sonny Adam Shields
Respondent:
Warden of USP Lee County
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Felipe Cabrera-Huato v. USP Lompoc Warden
as 2:2024cv02892
Petitioner:
Felipe Cabrera-Huato
Respondent:
USP Lompoc Warden
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Michael Owlfeather-Gorbey v. USA, et al
as 24-5077
Plaintiff:
Michael S. Gorbey
Defendant:
United States of America, (i.e. Federal Judges), Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Director Administration FBOP Grand Prairie Texas Designation Center and others
Glafiro Gonzalez v. Federal Bureau of Prison et al
as 2:2024cv01944
Plaintiff:
Glafiro Gonzalez
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prison, Warden USP Lompoc, Assistant Warden USP Lompoc and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.