Case: Mayock v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

3:85-05169 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: July 31, 1985

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In 1985, James R. Mayock, an immigration attorney, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to compel the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS") to comply with certain Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, (FOIA) requests which he made on behalf of clients. After the specific FOIA requests of Mayock's clients were resolved by the parties and the Court, Mayock pursued the case in his own name, asserting that the INS had engaged in a pa…

In 1985, James R. Mayock, an immigration attorney, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to compel the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS") to comply with certain Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, (FOIA) requests which he made on behalf of clients. After the specific FOIA requests of Mayock's clients were resolved by the parties and the Court, Mayock pursued the case in his own name, asserting that the INS had engaged in a pattern and practice of failing to comply with FOIA requests within the statutory 10-day period, thereby depriving aliens of information necessary to enable them to contest deportation proceedings. Mayock moved for summary judgment and injunctive relief. The INS responded with a cross-motion for summary judgment.

The District Court (Judge Charles A. Legge) granted summary judgment in favor of Mayock and issued an order of injunctive relief. Mayock v. I.N.S., 714 F.Supp. 1558 (N.D.Cal. 1989). The INS appealed. In a separate order, Judge Legge denied Mayock attorney's fees for the time his client represented himself pro se, but awarded the firm that subsequently represented him fees in the amount of $158,372 and cost of $9,598.03. Mayock v. I.N.S., 736 F.Supp. 1561 (N.D.Cal. 1990).

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Circuit Judge Beezer) reversed and remanded the District Court judgment and injunction, finding that fact issues existed which precluded summary judgment, including whether an increasing workload at INS offices created "exceptional circumstances" for its failure to timely respond to FOIA requests and whether INS demonstrated "due diligence" in responding to the requests. Mayock v. Nelson, 938 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1991).

As there is no PACER docket available and no subsequent published opinions, we do not know how the case proceeded after remand.

Summary Authors

Dan Dalton (12/3/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Beezer, Robert R. (Washington)

Brunetti, Melvin T. (Nevada)

Hug, Procter Ralph Jr. (Nevada)

Legge, Charles A. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Casente, Salvador A (California)

Koenig, Peter (California)

Mayock, James R (California)

Sinrod, Eric J (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bondy, Thomas M. (District of Columbia)

Russoneillo, Joseph P. (California)

Judge(s)

Beezer, Robert R. (Washington)

Brunetti, Melvin T. (Nevada)

Hug, Procter Ralph Jr. (Nevada)

Legge, Charles A. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Casente, Salvador A (California)

Koenig, Peter (California)

Mayock, James R (California)

Sinrod, Eric J (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bondy, Thomas M. (District of Columbia)

Russoneillo, Joseph P. (California)

Wolfe, Andrew M. (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

3:85-05169

Opinion and Order

Mayock v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

June 19, 1989

June 19, 1989

Order/Opinion

3:85-05169

Opinion and Order

Mayock v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

May 16, 1990

May 16, 1990

Order/Opinion

89-15977

Opinion

Mayock v. Nelson

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

July 10, 1991

July 10, 1991

Order/Opinion

Docket

Last updated Sept. 1, 2022, 3:18 a.m.

Docket sheet not available via the Clearinghouse.

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Key Dates

Filing Date: July 31, 1985

Case Ongoing: No reason to think so

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Immigration attorney who sought FOIA requests from the INS

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Immigration & Naturalization Service, Federal

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552

Availably Documents:

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Unknown

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Unknown

Issues

General:

Records Disclosure

Immigration/Border:

Immigration lawyers