Cases 31 - 40 of 74
Hernandez-Aviles v. Decker
as 20-3995
Petitioner:
Noe Hernandez-Aviles
Respondent:
Attorney General William P. Barr, in his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Acting Secretary Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Bernal Gutierrez v. Decker
as 20-3531
Respondent:
Director Thomas Decker, New York Field Office of U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement, Carl E. Du Bois, Sheriff of Orange County, Chad F. Wolf, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and others
Petitioner:
Juan Edgar Bernal Gutierrez
Black v. Decker
as 20-3224
Respondent:
Sheriff Carl E. Dubois, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Orange County, New York, Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Director of New York Field Office of U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement and Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Petitioner:
Carol Williams Black
State of New York v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al
as 1:2020cv05349
Defendant:
United States Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Matthew Albence and others
Plaintiff:
State of New York
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. ยง 702
Velesaca v. Wolf
as 20-2153
Petitioner:
Jose L. Velesaca, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated and Abraham Carlo Uzategui Navarro, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Respondent:
Matthew Albence, in his official capacity as the Acting Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Thomas R. Decker, in his official capacity as New York Field Office Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement and others
Gutierrez v. Dubois
as 20-2041
Respondent / Appellee:
Matthew Albence, in his official capacity as the Acting Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Francis Russo, Area Director, Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement, JFK Port of Entry, Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security and others
Petitioner / Appellant:
Ramon Gutierrez
Respondent:
Kevin McAleenan, Acting Secretary, Department of Homeland Security and Donald D. Vitiello, District Director, Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement
Garcia v. Decker
as 20-1649
Respondent:
Chad F. Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as Field Office Director, New York City Field Office, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and William P. Barr, in his official capacity as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice
Petitioner:
Oscar Leonel Garcia
Guerrero v. Decker
as 20-1646
Respondent / Appellee:
Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as New York Field Office Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Department of Homeland Security, Attorney William P. Barr, in his official capacity as United States Attorney General and others
Petitioner / Appellant:
Idalia Guerrero
Guerrero v. Decker
as 20-1532
Respondent:
Attorney William P. Barr, in his official capacity as United States Attorney General, Director Thomas Decker, in his official capacity as New York Field Office Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, United States Department of Homeland Security and others
Petitioner:
Idalia Guerrero
Sophia v. Decker
as 20-1255
Respondent:
James McHenry, as Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, William P. Barr, as Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice, Chad F. Wolf, as Acting Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and others
Petitioner:
Naishel Sophia
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.
