Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Hodge v. Mayorkas
as 23-7988
Petitioner / Appellant:
OSVALDO HODGE
Respondent / Appellee:
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY, in his official capacity as Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, in his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, THOMAS BROPHY, in his official capacity as Acting Field Office Director, Buffalo Field Office, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others
Mathon v. Barr
as 21-3038
Petitioner:
Frantz Mathon
Respondent:
William P. Barr, Attorney General of the United States, Thomas E. Feeley, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, Buffalo Field Office, U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security and others
Thomas v. Garland
as 21-526
Respondent:
Thomas Brophy, Facility Director Buffalo Federal Detention Facility, Robert M. Wilkinson, Acting United States Attorney General, Merrick B. Garland, Acting United States Attorney General and others
Petitioner:
Harvel Thomas
Thomas v. Barr
as 20-4029
Respondent:
Thomas Brophy, Facility Director Buffalo Federal Detention Facility, Thomas E. Feeley, Field Office Director for Detention and Removal, Buffalo Field Office, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, William P. Barr, Attorney General of the United States and others
Petitioner:
Harvel Thomas
Singh v. Barr
as 19-729
Undetermined:
Thomas Brophy, Facility Director, Buffalo Federal Detention Facility, Department of Homeland Security, William P. Barr, Attorney General of the United States and others
Xu v. Barr, et al
as 19-1044
Respondent / Appellee:
THOMAS BROPHY, Assistant Field Office Director, KIRSTJEN MICHELE NIELSEN, Secretary of Homeland Security, WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General and others
Petitioner / Appellant:
LIQUN XU, a/k/a Dan Xu
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.
