Cases 1 - 10 of 19
United States of America v. Chen, et al.
as 26-4596
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
ALEXANDER G. RAMOS
Movant:
DEBBIE FENGJIE CHEN
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv03250
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv02109
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv00694
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv00926
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv00603
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105 (a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Detainee
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv00332
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Interested Party:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105 (a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Det
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv00025
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 25-6861
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Woodside Credit, LLC v. Fadi Elias et al
as 8:2025cv02146
Plaintiff:
Woodside Credit, LLC
Defendant:
Fadi Elias, Alexander G. Ramos, Classic Motors, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
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.
