Cases 11 - 20 of 42
Jones v. USA
as 3:2020cv08153
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Willie Byron Jones, Sr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
JONES v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv22914
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
BYRON JONES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
USA v. Byron Jones, et al
as 19-30935
Defendant / Appellant:
BYRON JONES, also known as Big Baby Jones, DELOYD JONES, also known as Puggy Jones and SIDNEY PATTERSON, also known as Duda Man Patterson
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Jones v. Sawyer
as 1:2019cv04893
Respondent:
Kathleen H. Sawyer
Petitioner:
Byron Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Jones v. Janssen Research & Development, LLC, f/k/a Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceuticals Research and Development LLC et al
as 2:2019cv06987
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Company, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. f/k/a Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc. f/k/a Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Ortho LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Byron Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
JONES v. TRATE
as 1:2018cv00375
Respondent:
BRADLEY M. TRATE
Petitioner:
BYRON JONES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jones v. Davis
as 3:2018cv00377
Respondent:
Lori Davis and Lorie Davis
Petitioner:
Byron Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
USA v. Deloyd Jones, et al
as 18-30256
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
DELOYD JONES, also known as Puggy Jones, BYRON JONES, also known as Big Baby Jones and SIDNEY PATTERSON, Duda Man Patterson
Byron Jones v. Sposato, et al
as 17-3335
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BYRON JONES
Defendant - Appellee:
CASE MANAGER SPOSATO and COUNSELOR HITE, Loretto Camp
Jones et al v. 7-Eleven, Inc.
as 3:2017cv00502
Plaintiff:
Byron Jones and Maryosha L. King
Defendant:
7-Eleven, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
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.
