Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 1, 2024

Hanan v. USCIS

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
4:23-cv-02414
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureSummary Judgment
In one sentence

In Hanan v. USCIS, Judge Gilliam ordered supplemental briefing before deciding the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment.

Who this affects

Ofir Hanan and the other plaintiffs, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the other defendants, and their pending cross-motions for summary judgment; both sides were required to file supplemental briefs.

What happened

In Ofir Hanan v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the parties had filed cross-motions asking the court to decide the case without a trial.

After those motions were filed, the Supreme Court issued decisions in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Department of State v. Muñoz that could affect the issues in the motions.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. directed both sides to file simultaneous supplemental briefs of no more than 10 pages by August 16, 2024. The court did not decide the cross-motions in this order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Hanan v. USCIS · No. 4:23-cv-02414
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
Aug. 1, 2024

Background

The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. A summary-judgment motion asks the court to decide a case based on the legal and factual record without a trial. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the parties’ specific arguments.

Supplemental briefing

While the motions were pending, the Supreme Court decided Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Department of State v. Muñoz. The court stated that those decisions might be relevant to resolving the cross-motions. It directed the parties to file simultaneous supplemental briefs, each no more than 10 pages, addressing the effect of those decisions on the issues raised in the motions.

The supplemental briefs were due August 16, 2024. The court stated that replies were not permitted unless it ordered otherwise, and that the cross-motions would be considered submitted when the supplemental briefs were received unless the court ordered otherwise.

Disposition

The court ordered supplemental briefing and did not grant or deny either cross-motion for summary judgment in this order. The opinion was signed by United States District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.