Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled July 27, 2022

American Immigration Council v. United States Citizenship and Immigration…

Full caption

American Immigration Council v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Judge
Donna Ryu
Docket
4:20-cv-03266
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
6
Civil ProcedureImmigration
In one sentence

In American Immigration Council v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Judge Ryu vacated and rescheduled the case-management conference for October 5, 2022.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and federal defendant agencies in this Freedom of Information Act case were affected by the rescheduling order, which moved their Further Case Management Conference to October 5, 2022 and required an updated joint statement.

What happened

American Immigration Council, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, and Human Rights Watch sued federal immigration agencies under the Freedom of Information Act over four information requests concerning the Migrant Protection Protocols.

The parties jointly asked to postpone an August 3, 2022, case-management conference because they believed the case could be resolved after a Supreme Court decision concerning that program, but needed more time to reach an agreement.

Judge Ryu granted the request as modified: she vacated the August 3 conference, continued it to October 5, 2022, by videoconference, and required an updated joint case-management statement by September 28, 2022.

The detailed version

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

Case
American Immigration Council v. United States Citizenship and Immigration… · No. 4:20-cv-03266
Judge
Donna Ryu
Date
July 27, 2022

Background

American Immigration Council, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and Human Rights Watch brought this Freedom of Information Act case against United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, United States Customs and Border Protection, and United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The case concerns four information requests about the Migrant Protection Protocols.

The parties described developments concerning that program, including the Supreme Court's June 30, 2022, decision reversing the Fifth Circuit's decision and holding that the administration's rescission of the program was a valid final agency action. The parties stated that, in light of that decision, they understood the program would not be implemented going forward and believed the case could be resolved, but needed additional time to reach an agreement.

Request and Order

The parties jointly requested that the August 3, 2022, Further Case Management Conference be vacated and continued to October 3, 2022, or as soon thereafter as the court was available. They stated that judicial intervention was not then needed and that their earlier joint case-management statement remained accurate.

The court ordered the conference vacated and continued it, as modified, to October 5, 2022, at 1:30 p.m. in Oakland by videoconference only. The court also ordered the parties to file an updated joint case-management conference statement by September 28, 2022.

Result

This was a scheduling order. It did not decide the merits of the Freedom of Information Act claims or otherwise resolve the parties' dispute. Judge Ryu ordered the conference continued as modified.

The authoritative version

Read the full 6-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.