Cases 21 - 30 of 146
Venkataram v. United States Bureau of Prisons et al
as 1:2016cv23044
Plaintiff:
Natarajan Venkataram
Defendant:
United States Bureau of Prisons , J Hollingsworth, Dynan and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Autry Jones v. USA, et al
as 16-50721
Plaintiff - Appellant:
AUTRY LEE JONES
Defendant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ADVANCE TECHNOLOGIES GROUP, J. HOLLINGSWORTH, Warden and others
ALAZZAM v. HOLLINGSWORTH
as 1:2016cv03276
Petitioner:
MOHAMMED ALAZZAM
Respondent:
J. HOLLINGSWORTH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
GONZALEZ v. HOLLINGSWORTH
as 1:2016cv02946
Petitioner:
JOSE GONZALEZ
Respondent:
J. HOLLINGSWORTH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Jones v. United States of America et al
as 1:2016cv00613
Defendant:
Advance Technologies Group, N. Grimes, J. Hollingsworth and others
Plaintiff:
Autry Lee Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Tort Claim
PEARSON v. HOLLINGSWORTH
as 1:2016cv00879
Petitioner:
PRESTON PEARSON
Respondent:
J. HOLLINGSWORTH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
James Roudabush, Jr. v. Mason, et al
as 16-5111
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
Ms. Mason, A. Warden, Robinson, Unit Mgr., Wright, Case Mgr. and others
James Roudabush, Jr. v. Charles Samuels, Jr., et al
as 16-5114
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
Charles E. Samuels, Jr., J. Hollingsworth, Bittner, LT. and others
James Roudabush, Jr. v. C. Dynan, et al
as 16-5092
Plaintiff - Appellant:
James Lester Roudabush, Jr.
Defendant - Appellee:
C. Dynan, Assistant Warden, J. Hollingsworth, Warden, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., Director, F-BOP and others
PEARSON v. WARDEN J HOLLINGSWORTH
as 1:2016cv01860
Petitioner:
PRESTON PEARSON
Respondent:
WARDEN J HOLLINGSWORTH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
