Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Gener Rayo-Velasquez v. Todd Blanche
as 26-3838
Petitioner:
GENER RAYO-VELASQUEZ
Respondent:
TODD W. BLANCHE, U.S. Attorney General
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2026cv03631
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv02194
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2026cv62047
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv07993
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Eliu Navarro Rayo v. Attorney General United States of America
as 26-2666
Petitioner:
ELIU NAVARRO RAYO
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Rayos v. Greenwood Motor Lines Inc. et al
as 3:2026cv01696
Plaintiff:
Carlo Akin Rayos
Defendant:
John Doe and Greenwood Motor Lines Inc. doing business as R&L Carriers Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Auto Negligence
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01861
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Juan Jose Lopez Rayo v. United States Of America, et al
as 2:2026cv05404
Plaintiff:
Lopez Rayo Jose Juan
Defendant:
United States Of America, Chang Jung Sang and Does 1 to 50, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346 Tort Claim
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv01287
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (IMMIGRATION)
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.
