Case: East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump

3:18-cv-06810 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Filed Date: Nov. 9, 2018

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On November 9, 2018, several nonprofit organizations filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, challenging a Trump Administration asylum policy that prohibited people who enter the U.S. along the southern border somewhere other than a designated port of entry from obtaining asylum. The plaintiffs—East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Al Otro Lado, Innovation Law Lab, and Central American Resource Center—challenged an interim final rule promulgated on November 8, 2018, declaring all those subject to a presidential proclamation concerning the southern border ineligible for asylum. The proclamation, “Presidential Proclamation Addressing Mass Migration Through the Southern Border of the United States,” blocked the entry of all people entering the U.S. without inspection at the southern border. The plaintiffs claimed violations of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and sought declaratory and injunctive relief. The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu.

The complaint stated that the plaintiff organizations assisted refugees fleeing political persecution, terror, war, intolerance, exploitation, and other violence by providing sanctuary, support, community organizing assistance, advocacy, and legal services. The plaintiffs argued that under existing federal law, "manner of entry cannot constitute a categorical asylum bar." The complaint stated that federal law expressly provides that "[a]ny alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival . . . ), . . . may apply for asylum.” The plaintiffs further argued that in proclaiming its new policy, the Department of Homeland Security did not follow necessary procedural steps, like providing a notice and comment period, nor did it have good cause for failing to do so.

The case was reassigned to Judge Jon S. Tigar on November 13, 2018.

On November 19, 2018, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order and ordered the government to show cause why it should not be permanently enjoined from putting in place its latest asylum policy. 349 F. Supp. 3d 838. Judge Tigar held that the government's new rule and proclamation "irreconcilably conflict[ed] with the INA and the expressed intent of Congress" and that "w]hatever the scope of the President’s authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden." The court concluded that the plaintiff organizations and the immigrants they represented would suffer irreparable injury without the TRO because asylum seekers would face a greater risk of violence and other harms at the border, and many would be unable to make meritorious asylum claims. The TRO would remain in effect until December 19, 2018, at which point the government was to show cause why it should not be permanently enjoined from implementing the new rule and proclamation.

Later that month, the defendants appealed the TRO to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and asked the district court for a stay of the TRO pending the Ninth Circuit’s decision. The district court denied the government's request for a stay pending appeal on November 30, 2018. 354 F. Supp. 3d 1085. The defendants also filed an emergency motion in the Ninth Circuit for a stay of the TRO pending appeal.

The following month, on December 7, the Ninth Circuit denied the government's emergency stay request, agreeing with the district court that the new asylum rule was likely inconsistent with existing federal law. 932 F.3d 742. The defendants also sought a stay from the U.S. Supreme Court, but that request was denied on December 21, 2018. 139 S. Ct. 782.

Meanwhile, on December 4, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the district court.

About two weeks later, on December 19, the district court granted the plaintiffs' preliminary injunction, ordering the defendants to return to pre-rule practices for processing asylum applications and preventing them from taking any action continuing to implement the rule pending further decisions. 354 F. Supp. 3d 1094. Judge Tigar found that the plaintiff organizations had organizational standing and were likely to succeed on the merits of their INA claim, and that a nationwide injunction was warranted. The defendants again appealed to the Ninth Circuit. The appeal of the preliminary injunction was consolidated with the defendants' appeal of the TRO.

On February 11, 2019, the defendants filed a motion to stay the district court proceedings pending the Ninth Circuit appeal, and on March 5, 2019, that motion was granted.

Later that year, on August 2, the rule challenged in this case was also vacated by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in O.A. v. Trump.

On February 28, 2020, the Ninth Circuit upheld the district court's nationwide injunction in this case. 950 F.3d 1242. The Ninth Circuit found that the rule violated the INA, which supports eligibility for asylum seekers regardless of where they enter the U.S. Thus, the Court also found that the rule was an arbitrary and capricious interpretation of the relevant INA provisions, and ran afoul of the U.S.'s non-refoulement obligations under the International Refugee Convention.

The defendants petitioned the Ninth Circuit for a rehearing en banc later that year. On February 2, 2021, the Biden Administration revoked the “Presidential Proclamation Addressing Mass Migration Through the Southern Border of the United States.” The following month, on March 24, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the revocation did not make the case moot, but denied the petition for rehearing en banc. 993 F.3d 640.

On June 22, 2022, the defendants filed an unopposed motion in the district court to continue the stay of proceedings because the Biden Administration was reconsidering the challenged rule. The court granted the motion two days later. In February of the following year, the Biden Administration proposed a new rule rescinding the challenged rule. The new rule would create a presumption (with some exceptions) against granting people asylum if they passed through another country on the way from their home country to the United States’ southern border. The rule became final on May 16, 2023.

On May 11, 2023, the plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to file an amended and supplemental complaint and to lift the stay of proceedings. The following day, the court granted the parties’ stipulated proposed order, which allowed the plaintiffs leave to file an amended and supplemental complaint.

The plaintiffs filed this new complaint on May 18, 2023. They alleged that the Biden administration’s new rule would “resuscitate and combine the illegal features of the two previous asylum bans that this Court and the Ninth Circuit found to be unlawful.” The plaintiffs alleged that the new rule, apart from its limited exceptions, would cause anyone from a country other than Mexico to be automatically denied asylum unless they scheduled one of the few available appointments on the CBP One app, were denied asylum in a country they had traveled through before reaching the U.S., or got permission to come to the U.S. through a parole program. The plaintiffs argued that this rule violated the APA because it contradicted the INA, was arbitrary and capricious, and lacked a sufficient comment period. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment and an order vacating and enjoining the rule.

Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment on June 5, 2023. The defendants filed their own motion for summary judgment later that month.

On July 25, 2023, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. 2023 WL 4729278. Judge Tigar held that the plaintiffs had organizational standing and that the INA’s limitations on judicial review and injunctive relief were inapplicable. As to the merits, Judge Tigar held that the rule violated the APA in three ways. First, the rule contradicted the INA because the presumption against granting asylum and its specific exceptions did not align with congressional intent. Second, the rule was arbitrary and capricious because Congress did not intend for asylum eligibility to depend on whether a person could have applied for asylum in another country, and because many of the exceptions to the presumption were not available to many people. Third, the rule violated the APA’s procedural rules because the administration did not give people enough time to comment on it, did not inform the public about related policy changes they were enacting, and did not publicly release the data they based the rule on. Therefore, Judge Tigar vacated the rule and remanded it to the agencies.

However, the defendants immediately appealed the ruling to the Ninth Circuit and moved to stay the ruling pending appeal. The district court denied the emergency motion for stay pending appeal on August 1, 2023.

Two days later, on August 3, the Ninth Circuit granted the defendants’ motion to stay the summary judgment ruling pending appeal. Oral argument is currently scheduled for November 7, 2023.

	Document
3:18-cv-06810	Docket [PACER]	Feb. 28, 2020	Feb. 28, 2020 Docket
1 3:18-cv-06810	Complaint	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 Complaint
43 3:18-cv-06810	Order Granting Temporary Restraining Order; Order to Show Cause Re Preliminary Injunction	Nov. 19, 2018	Nov. 19, 2018 Order/Opinion 349 F.Supp.3d 838
61 3:18-cv-06810	Order Denying Motion for Stay Pending Appeal	Nov. 30, 2018	Nov. 30, 2018 Order/Opinion 354 F.Supp.3d 1085
18-17274	Order U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit	Dec. 7, 2018	Dec. 7, 2018 Order/Opinion 932 F.3d 742
99 3:18-cv-06810	Order Granting Preliminary Injunction	Dec. 19, 2018	Dec. 19, 2018 Order/Opinion 349 F.Supp.3d 838
81 3:18-cv-06810 18-17274 18-17436	Opinion U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit	Feb. 28, 2020	Feb. 28, 2020 Order/Opinion 950 F.3d 1242
132 3:18-cv-06810	Order and Amended Opinion East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Biden U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit	March 24, 2021	March 24, 2021 Order/Opinion 993 F.3d 640
164 3:18-cv-06810	Amended and Supplemental Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Biden	May 18, 2023	May 18, 2023 Complaint
187 3:18-cv-06810	Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Biden	July 25, 2023	July 25, 2023 Order/Opinion 683 F.Supp.3d 1025

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (Immigration Action) against All Defendants, (Filing Fee: $400.00, receipt number 0971-12836235). Filed by Al Otro Lado, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab, Central American Resource Center. (Attachments: #(1) Civil Cover Sheet)(Newell, Jennifer) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/09/2018) 1 Civil Cover Sheet View on RECAP	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 Clearinghouse
2	Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. Counsel is required to send chambers a copy of the initiating documents pursuant to L.R. 5-1(e)(7). A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 11/23/2018. (as, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/09/2018)	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 PACER
3	Proposed Summons. (Newell, Jennifer) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/09/2018)	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 PACER
4	NOTICE of Appearance by Cody H. Wofsy (Wofsy, Cody) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/09/2018)	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 PACER
5	MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 310, receipt number 26DE7N7T.) Filing fee previously paid on 11/9/2018 filed by Al Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab. (Gelernt, Lee) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/09/2018)	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 PACER
6	MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 310, receipt number 0971-12838766.) filed by Al Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab. (Rabinovitz, Judy) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/09/2018)	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 PACER
7	MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 310, receipt number 0971-12838819.) filed by Al Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab. (Jadwat, Omar) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/09/2018)	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 PACER
8	MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Al Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum In Support of a Temporary Restraining Order, # 2 Declaration Adam Isacson, # 3 Declaration of Daniel Sharp, # 4 Declaration of Erika Pinheiro, # 5 Declaration of Guy Goodwin-Gill, # 6 Declaration of Stephen Manning, # 7 Declaration of Michael Smith, # 8 Proposed Order, # 9 Common)(Newell, Jennifer) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/09/2018) 1 Memorandum In Support of a Temporary Restraining Order View on RECAP 2 Declaration Adam Isacson View on RECAP 3 Declaration of Daniel Sharp View on RECAP 4 Declaration of Erika Pinheiro View on RECAP 5 Declaration of Guy Goodwin-Gill View on RECAP 6 Declaration of Stephen Manning View on RECAP 7 Declaration of Michael Smith View on RECAP 8 Proposed Order View on PACER 9 Common View on RECAP	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 RECAP
13	CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge. (napS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/9/2018) (Entered: 11/13/2018)	Nov. 9, 2018	Nov. 9, 2018 PACER
9	ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Jon S. Tigar for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu no longer assigned to the case. This case is assigned to a judge who participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. Signed by Executive Committee on 11/13/2018. (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(jmlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/13/2018) (Entered: 11/13/2018)	Nov. 13, 2018	Nov. 13, 2018 PACER
10	Certificate of Interested Entities by Al Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab (Newell, Jennifer) (Filed on 11/13/2018) (Entered: 11/13/2018)	Nov. 13, 2018	Nov. 13, 2018 PACER
11	SCHEDULING ORDER re 8 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab, Central American Resource Center, Al Otro Lado. Responses due by 11/15/2018. Replies due by 11/16/2018. Motion Hearing set for 11/19/2018 at 9:30 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 9, 19th Floor before Judge Jon S. Tigar. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on November 13, 2018. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/13/2018) (Entered: 11/13/2018)	Nov. 13, 2018	Nov. 13, 2018 RECAP
12	NOTICE of Appearance by Erez R. Reuveni (Reuveni, Erez) (Filed on 11/13/2018) (Entered: 11/13/2018)	Nov. 13, 2018	Nov. 13, 2018 PACER
14	NOTICE of Appearance by Vasudha Talla (Talla, Vasudha) (Filed on 11/14/2018) (Entered: 11/14/2018)	Nov. 14, 2018	Nov. 14, 2018 PACER
15	NOTICE of Appearance by Christine Patricia Sun (Sun, Christine) (Filed on 11/14/2018) (Entered: 11/14/2018)	Nov. 14, 2018	Nov. 14, 2018 PACER
16	Clerk's Notice of Video Recording Request. Video Camera hearing set for 11/19/2018 at 9:30 AM. Objections to Video Recording due 11/16/2018 by 12:00 PM. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/14/2018) (Entered: 11/14/2018)	Nov. 14, 2018	Nov. 14, 2018 PACER
17	CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Al Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab (Wofsy, Cody) (Filed on 11/14/2018) (Entered: 11/14/2018)	Nov. 14, 2018	Nov. 14, 2018 PACER
18	Summons Issued as to All Defendants. (msrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/14/2018) (Entered: 11/14/2018)	Nov. 14, 2018	Nov. 14, 2018 PACER
19	Consent MOTION to File Amicus Curiae Brief on Shortened Time filed by State of Washington. Motion Hearing set for 11/14/2018 06:00 PM before Judge Jon S. Tigar. Responses due by 11/14/2018. Replies due by 11/14/2018. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Brief of Amicus Curiae)(Lin, Megan) (Filed on 11/14/2018) (Entered: 11/14/2018) 1 View on RECAP	Nov. 14, 2018	Nov. 14, 2018 PACER
20	ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFBefore the Court is an Administrative Motion for Leave to File an Amicus Brief in support of Plaintiffs' request for a temporary restraining order, filed by the States of Washington, Massachusetts, New York, and California (the "States"). ECF No. 19. The motion includes the proposed amicus brief as an exhibit. See ECF No. 19-1. The States represent that Defendants do not oppose the motion, provided that the proposed amicus brief is fewer than ten pages and this motion was filed by 6:00 p.m. on November 14, 2018. ECF No. 19 at 2. The States have complied with these requirements. See ECF No. 19-1."There are no strict prerequisites that must be established prior to qualifying for amicus status; an individual seeking to appear as amicus must merely make a showing that his participation is useful to or otherwise desirable to the court." In re Roxford Foods Litig., 790 F. Supp. 987, 997 (E.D. Cal. 1991) (citation omitted). Having reviewed the proposed amicus brief, the Court grants the States' motion for leave to file.The States shall file their proposed amicus brief, see ECF No. 19-1, as soon as practicable, and in any event, no later than November 15, 2018 by 12:00 p.m. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (Entered: 11/14/2018)	Nov. 14, 2018	Nov. 14, 2018 PACER
21	ORDER UNSEALING DOCKET. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on November 14, 2018. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2018) (Entered: 11/15/2018)	Nov. 15, 2018	Nov. 15, 2018 RECAP
22	ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY LEE GELERNT PRO HAC VICE by Judge Jon S. Tigar granting 5 Motion for Pro Hac Vice. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2018) (Entered: 11/15/2018)	Nov. 15, 2018	Nov. 15, 2018 PACER
23	ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY OMAR JADWAT PRO HAC VICE by Judge Jon S. Tigar granting 7 Motion for Pro Hac Vice. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2018) (Entered: 11/15/2018)	Nov. 15, 2018	Nov. 15, 2018 PACER
24	ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY JUDY RABINOVITZ PRO HAC VICE by Judge Jon S. Tigar granting 6 Motion for Pro Hac Vice. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2018) (Entered: 11/15/2018)	Nov. 15, 2018	Nov. 15, 2018 PACER
25	First MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice Baher Azmy ( Filing fee $ 310, receipt number 0971-12848902.) filed by Al Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service Certificate Good Standing)(Azmy, Baher) (Filed on 11/15/2018) (Entered: 11/15/2018)	Nov. 15, 2018	Nov. 15, 2018 PACER
26	ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF BAHER AZMY PRO HAC VICE by Judge Jon S. Tigar granting 25 Motion for Pro Hac Vice. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2018) (Entered: 11/15/2018)	Nov. 15, 2018	Nov. 15, 2018 RECAP
27	OPPOSITION/RESPONSE (re 8 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order ) filed byLee Francis Cissna, Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), Kevin K. McAleenan, James McHenry, Kirstjen M. Nielsen, Donald J. Trump, U.S Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Ronald D. Vitiello, Matthew G. Whitaker. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Reuveni, Erez) (Filed on 11/15/2018) (Entered: 11/15/2018)	Nov. 15, 2018	Nov. 15, 2018 RECAP
28	First MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice Angelo Guisado ( Filing fee $ 310, receipt number 0971-12854228.) filed by Al Otro Lado. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing)(Guisado, Angelo) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 PACER
29	NOTICE of Appearance by Scott G. Stewart (Stewart, Scott) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 PACER
30	NOTICE of Appearance by Julie Michelle Veroff (Veroff, Julie) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 RECAP
31	NOTICE of Appearance by Celso Javier Perez (Perez, Celso) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 RECAP
32	NOTICE REGARDING VIDEO RECORDING re: 16 Clerk's Notice of Video Recording Request. All parties have consented to the video recording of the proceeding. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 RECAP
33	ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY ANGELO GUISADO PRO HAC VICE by Judge Jon S. Tigar granting 28 Motion for Pro Hac Vice. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 RECAP
34	MOTION for Leave to File Amicus Brief on Jurisdictional Issues in Support of Defendants filed by Immigration Reform Law Institute. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit Proposed Amicus Brief, # 3 Certificate/Proof of Service COS)(Joseph, Lawrence) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 RECAP
35	REPLY (re 8 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order ) filed byAl Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Chavla, # 2 Declaration of Cutlip-Mason, # 3 Declaration of Griffey, # 4 Declaration of Isacson, # 5 Declaration of Love, # 6 Declaration of Manning, # 7 Declaration of Penman, # 8 Declaration of Pinheiro, # 9 Declaration of Rodriguez, # 10 Declaration Seyler)(Gelernt, Lee) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 RECAP
36	ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFAmicus Curiae Immigration Reform Law Institutes (IRLI) has filed a motion for leave to file an amicus brief. ECF No. 34. The brief seeks to support Defendants' arguments that Plaintiffs lack standing to bring their lawsuit. ECF No. 34-2 at 5. The motion was filed less than 90 minutes before Plaintiffs' reply brief was due, and in fact Plaintiffs' reply brief has now been filed. Nonetheless, given the importance of the case and to ensure full consideration of all the relevant issues, the Court GRANTS the motion. IRLI's brief is not deemed filed. IRLI must file its brief by Saturday, November 16, 2018, at 5:00 p.m.IRLI's brief appears to repeat arguments already made by the Government, as IRLI acknowledges. ECF No. 34 at 4. Plaintiffs might therefore conclude that no response is necessary. Should they wish to file one, however, they may do so by Sunday, November 18, 2018, at 4:00 p.m. Any such response must not exceed four pages, the length of IRLI's brief. (This is a text-only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 PACER
37	Brief re 36 Order on Motion for Leave to File,,,, Amicus Brief filed as previously lodged as ECF 34-2 filed byImmigration Reform Law Institute. (Related document(s) 36 ) (Joseph, Lawrence) (Filed on 11/16/2018) (Entered: 11/16/2018)	Nov. 16, 2018	Nov. 16, 2018 RECAP
38	NOTICE of Appearance by Francesca M Genova (Genova, Francesca) (Filed on 11/18/2018) (Entered: 11/18/2018)	Nov. 18, 2018	Nov. 18, 2018 RECAP
39	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Jon S. Tigar: Motion Hearing held on 11/19/2018 re 8 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab, Central American Resource Center, Al Otro Lado. Total Time in Court: 1 hour, 19 minutes. Court Reporter: Belle Ball. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 11/19/2018) (Entered: 11/19/2018)	Nov. 19, 2018	Nov. 19, 2018 RECAP
40	First MOTION for leave to appear in Pro Hac Vice ( Filing fee $ 310, receipt number 0971-12859792.) filed by Al Otro Lado, Central American Resource Center, East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, Innovation Law Lab. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing)(Schwarz, Ghita) (Filed on 11/19/2018) (Entered: 11/19/2018)	Nov. 19, 2018	Nov. 19, 2018 PACER

Case: East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump

3:18-cv-06810 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Case Summary

Related Cases

People

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Docket

Case Details