Cases 1 - 8 of 8
HOFFMAN v. UNKNOWN BOP, DOJ, DOD EMPLOYEES
as 2:2023cv00495
Plaintiff:
ROBERT PATRICK HOFFMAN, II
Defendant:
UNKNOWN BOP, DOJ, DOD EMPLOYEES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Haneef Jackson-Bey v. Three Unknown Federal Agents, et al
as 23-1733
Plaintiff / Appellant:
HANEEF JACKSON-BEY
Defendant / Appellee:
THREE UNKNOW FEDERAL AGENTS, Agents of the DOJ, FBI, and USMS - In their individual capacities, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE and THREE UNKNOWN FEDERAL AGENTS, Agents of the DOJ, FBI, and USMS - In their individual capacities
Rivera v. United States of America et al
as 1:2022cv03545
Plaintiff:
Jasper Rivera
Defendant:
United States of America, FBOP - USP Thomson and DOJ
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Grissom v. FCC Butner et al
as 5:2020ct03128
Plaintiff:
Nathan LaRon Grissom
Defendant:
US Treasury, BOP, DOJ and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Francis Grandinetti, II v. CoreCivic, et al
as 18-16124
Petitioner - Appellant:
FRANCIS ANTHONY GRANDINETTI II
Respondent - Appellee:
CORECIVIC, CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA, in Nashville, TN, outgoing federal contractor(s), SAGUARO CORRECTIONAL CENTER, (dba) in Arizona, a federal-detention "private jail" for Hawaii, CSC, BRG, Wakenhut (Hilo), et al., previous contractors for Hawaii and U.S. (class) and others
HERRERA v. MOSHANNON VALLEY DOJ
as 3:2017cv00155
Plaintiff:
ALBERTO NIETO HERRERA
Defendant:
MOSHANNON VALLEY DOJ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ivan Mendez v. US Justice Sys, et al
as 11-1148
Plaintiff - Appellant:
IVAN L. MENDEZ
Defendant - Appellee:
US JUSTICE SYS, STATE OF DE, ALL OF THIS CR ORGN WORKERS and others
Montano v. U.S. Attorney Gen. et al
as 1:2008cv00608
Petitioner:
Victor Manuel Montano
Respondent:
U.S. Attorney Gen., Dept. of H. Sec., U.S. DOJ(EOIR) and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
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.
