Cases 1 - 10 of 52
Mejia v. Garland
as 23-496
Petitioner:
OSCAR ANTONIO MEJIA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00228
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Holloway v. Stengel
as 22-50699
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Arthur R. Holloway, Jr.
Defendant / Appellee:
Frank Stengel, Individual Capacity, Assistant Warden-John B. Connally Unit, Debra Gloor, Individual Capacity, Senior Practice Manager- John B. Connally Unit, Jamecia Rice and others
USA v. Mejia Romero
as 22-10470
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Humberto Antonio Mejia Romero
Mejia Vaquerano v. Mayorkas et al
as 1:2022cv00053
Plaintiff:
Elmer Antonio Mejia Vaquerano
Defendant:
Secretary Alejandro Nicholas Mayorkas, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Mejia-Celaya v. Garland
as 21-98
Petitioner:
RUBEN ANTONIO MEJIA-CELAYA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Wendy Zuniga-Martinez, et al v. Merrick Garland
as 21-3312
Petitioner:
BYRON ANTONIO MEJIA-ZUNIGA, NERY YULISSA MEJIA-ZUNIGA and WENDY YULISSA ZUNIGA-MARTINEZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Mejia-Ramos v. USA-2255
as 8:2021cv00339
Petitioner:
Eric Antonio Mejia-Ramos
Respondent:
USA-2255
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Mejia v. Rosen
as 20-2204
Petitioner:
LAZARO ANTONIO MEJIA
Respondent:
JEFFREY ROSEN, Acting Attorney General
Rosales et al v. Capital Interior Contractors et al
as 3:2020cv00916
Plaintiff:
Gilberto Rosales, Hector Polanco-Alvarez, Marcos Cabrera and others
Defendant:
Capital Interior Contractors, RDIC Incorporated and GTO Drywall
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1938 Fair Labor Standards 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.
