Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Lugman v. Cox
as 1:2024cv00413
Plaintiff:
Abdul K Lugman
Defendant:
J W Cox
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Banks v. Cox
as 1:2023cv01025
Plaintiff:
Robert Ross Banks
Defendant:
J W Cox
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Abebe v. Cox
as 1:2023cv00868
Plaintiff:
Unula Boo-Shawn Abebe
Defendant:
J W Cox
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Callery v. Cox
as 1:2023cv00839
Plaintiff:
Kevin Callery
Defendant:
J W Cox
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Abebe v. Cox et al
as 3:2023cv00447
Petitioner:
Unula Abebe
Respondent:
J. W. Cox and Merrick Garland
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
West v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
as 23-30353
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Donald Joseph West, Individually and on behalf of J F W
Defendant / Appellee:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Regional Director, Federal Bureau of Prisons and others
Moore v. Johnson et al
as 1:2022cv05672
Plaintiff:
Christopher Moore
Defendant:
C Johnson, C McConnell, C Rivers and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
West et al v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2022cv05408
Plaintiff:
Donald Joseph West and Douglas Mark West
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Director Federal Bureau of Prisons, Regional Director Federal Bureau of Prisons and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Davila v. Cox
as 22-40627
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Miguel Davila, Jr.
Defendant / Appellee:
Warden J. W. Cox, Officer Brown and Officer Munoz
Barlow v. Warden J. W. Cox
as 2:2022cv00161
Petitioner:
Kenneth A Barlow
Respondent:
Warden J. W. Cox
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
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.
