Cases 41 - 50 of 621
Qiryaqoz v. US Department of Homeland Security, Secretary of et al
as 4:2023cv11858
Plaintiff:
Naseem Mansoor Quiryaqoz and Naseem Mansoor Qiryaqoz
Defendant:
US Department of Homeland Security, Secretary of, US Citizenship and Immigration Service, Director of and US Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Giles v. US Attorney General et al
as 2:2023cv11828
Plaintiff:
Kevin L. Giles
Defendant:
US Attorney General, Dawn N. Ison, Sara D. Woodward and others
Franso v. US Department of Homeland Security, Secretary of et al
as 2:2023cv11792
Plaintiff:
MILAD NOAIL FRANSO
Defendant:
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Ur M. Jaddou, Merrick B. Garland and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Jabo v. US Department of Homeland Security, Secretary of et al
as 2:2023cv11767
Plaintiff:
FADI NOAIL FRANSO JABO
Defendant:
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Ur M. Jaddou, Merrick B. Garland and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Reaves v. Bauman
as 2:2023cv11633
Defendant:
Attorney General of the State of Michigan
Respondent:
Warden Catherine S. Bauman
Petitioner:
Turon Jerome Reaves
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv11586
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv11528
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Jessie v. Michigan Attorney General
as 2:2023cv11471
Petitioner:
Myron Gregory Jessie
Respondent:
Michigan Attorney General
Berry v. United States Attorney General
as 2:2023cv11425
Petitioner:
Duane Letroy Berry
Respondent:
United States Attorney General
Curtis v. Christianson
as 4:2023cv11391
Petitioner:
Ra'Sean Curtis
Respondent:
Attorney General of the State of Michigan and John Christiansen
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.
