Cases 11 - 16 of 16
Jose Carranza v. Eric Holder, Jr.
as 13-1804
Petitioner:
JOSE LUIS CARRANZA
Respondent:
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General and UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER
Mid-Atlantic Regional Org v. U. S. Dept. of Justice
as 10-1931
Petitioner:
MID-ATLANTIC REGIONAL ORGANIZING COALITION, LABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA and CRUZ HERNANDEZ, Organizer, Mid-Atlantic Regional Organizing Coalition, Laborers' International Union of North America
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER and HERITAGE LANDSCAPE SERVICES, LLC
Matthew Shortt v. Dick Clark's AB Theater
as 09-3442
Petitioner:
Matthew John Shortt, I
Respondent:
United States Department of Justice, EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW and Dick Clark's AB Theater, LLC
United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review v. Nguyen
as 4:2009cv02981
Plaintiff:
United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review and United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review
Defendant:
Ni Chi Nguyen
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 287 Petition to Enforce INS Subpoena
United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review v. Nguyen
as 3:2009cv02981
Plaintiff:
United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review
Defendant:
Ni Chi Nguyen
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 287 Petition to Enforce INS Subpoena
United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review v. Nguyen et al
as 4:2008cv05265
Petitioner:
United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review
Respondent:
Ni Chi Nguyen and Chung Van Do
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Plaintiff
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.
