Liborio Ramos v. Sessions

Background

Floricel Liborio Ramos filed a petition for a court order concerning her immigration detention. The filing states that the court granted the petition in part on February 15, 2018, and granted Ramos’s motion to enforce the judgment on March 13, 2018. Federal respondents appealed. The Ninth Circuit later held the appeal while related litigation was pending, and, after the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. Arteaga-Martinez, the federal respondents asked the Ninth Circuit to vacate the district court’s orders and remand the matter. The Ninth Circuit granted that request on March 1, 2024, vacated the February 15 and March 13 orders, and issued its mandate on April 23, 2024.

Joint Motion and Agreement

Ramos and the federal respondents jointly moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) for dismissal without prejudice. Rule 41(a)(2) allows a court to approve a plaintiff’s voluntary dismissal when the rule requires a court order. The parties agreed that Immigration and Customs Enforcement would not re-arrest or re-detain Ramos unless there was a change in circumstances, specifically a new criminal arrest or conviction and/or a final and executable administrative removal order. They also agreed that each side would bear its own costs and fees, and that Ramos would not seek attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act or any other law.

Ruling

Judge Jon S. Tigar stated that he had considered the joint motion and ordered that the action be dismissed without prejudice. The order did not reach or decide the underlying detention issue. Because the order uses the phrase “without prejudice,” it did not bar a later filing based solely on this dismissal.