Cases 21 - 30 of 50
Todd v. Lynch et al
as 2:2015cv01737
Plaintiff:
Jerome Eugene Todd
Defendant:
Loretta Lynch, US Congress, Department of Justice and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Stanley v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 2:2015cv00256
Plaintiff:
Brandon Lee Stanley
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv01768
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Trifonov vs. Fox et al
as 2:2014cv00366
Petitioner:
Plamen Vladimirov Trifonov
Respondent:
Jack Fox, David Y Miller, Eric Holder and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Leaming v. Samuels et al
as 2:2013cv01112
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Wayne Leaming
Defendant:
Charles E. Samuels, JR., Dennis M. Wong and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Leaming v. Doe et al
as 2:2012cv01724
Petitioner:
Kenneth Wayne Leaming
Respondent:
John Doe, FDC-Seatac, U.S Bureau of Prisons and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Tyrone Patin v. J. D. Arbaugh et al
as 2:2012cv01681
Defendant:
J. D. Arbaugh, J. D. Hayden, Marion Feather and others
Plaintiff:
Tyrone Patin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Colon v. McCaroll et al
as 2:2012cv01672
Plaintiff:
Lawrence Colon
Defendant:
McCaroll and Federal Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Abdul-Latif v. Feather et al
as 2:2012cv00177
Petitioner:
Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif
Respondent:
Marion Feather , United States Marshal's Service Operation Supervisor and Bureau of Prisons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Garcia v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 2:2011cv01029
Petitioner:
Arthur Garcia
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons and Marion Feather
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.
