Cases 21 - 30 of 194
Prigmore v. FCI Beaumont Staff
as 5:2022cv00331
Plaintiff:
William Prigmore
Defendant:
FCI Beaumont Staff, Warden Bryan K. Dobbs, Multiple Unknown Agents of the BOP and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
JAMES v. BOP
as 1:2022cv00640
Plaintiff:
KEITH ORBIE JAMES
Defendant:
BOP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Prisoner Bivens Action
Chestnut v. Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
as 1:2022cv02701
Petitioner:
Raymond Chestnut, Raymond Edward Chestnut and Ray Chestnut
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Chestnut v. Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
as 1:2022cv02420
Petitioner:
Raymond Edward Chestnut, Ray Chestnut and Raymond Chestnut
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
JACOBS v. BOP et al
as 1:2022cv00726
Petitioner:
CORY LEE JACOBS
Respondent:
BOP and DOJ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Crowe v. United States of America et al
as 5:2022cv00335
Plaintiff:
Patrick Crowe
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Bureau of Prisons (BOP), Brandon Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Tort Claim
DAKOTA v. BOP
as 1:2022cv00639
Plaintiff:
SARFATY J. DAKOTA
Defendant:
BOP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2022cv00142
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WILLIAMS v. BOP
as 1:2022cv00413
Petitioner:
ROBERT EARL WILLIAMS
Respondent:
BOP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Michael Owlfeather-Gorbey v. U. S. Attorney General
as 22-6391
Plaintiff / Appellant:
(CHIEF) COL. MICHAEL S. OWLFEATHER-GORBEY
Defendant / Appellee:
U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL and DIRECTOR, F. BOP
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.
