#RosalesvBiden янги (илгари #JacobvBiden номи билан танилган). Моррисон жамоаси иккинчи таҳрирдаги шикоятни (даъвони) ва дастлабки суд қарорини қабул қилиш ва судга мурожаат қилиш бўйича талабларни янгилади.
Forwarded from Morrison Urena, LC
2021 0707 115 Rosales pl opp to gov admin motion.pdf
150.3 KB
#RosalesvBiden #DV2021 Update: Just filed our opposition to this absurd administrative motion. Now we wait for Judge Chen to rule on it. Basically, Judge Chen needs to decide whether the hearing for July 15 is still on, or whether we postpone that hearing because of the government's latest last-minute motions.
Ўзимнинг асосий ишим бошқа бўлганлиги сабабли бир кунга кеч қолдим кечаги янгиликларни пост қилиш учун.
1. Судья Чен энди #RosalesvBiden (илгари Jacob) ишини бошка судга ўтқазиш учун қарор чиқарди ва бизнинг ишимизни энди бошқа Судья кўрадиган бўлади.
2. Автоматик равишда 16-июлда бўладиган суд мажлиси бекор қилинди.
3. #RosalesvBiden иши энди қайси судья олиши кутилмоқда.
4. Янгиликлар бўлиши билан ушбу каналда пост қолдирилади.
Эътиборингиз учун раҳмат!
1. Судья Чен энди #RosalesvBiden (илгари Jacob) ишини бошка судга ўтқазиш учун қарор чиқарди ва бизнинг ишимизни энди бошқа Судья кўрадиган бўлади.
2. Автоматик равишда 16-июлда бўладиган суд мажлиси бекор қилинди.
3. #RosalesvBiden иши энди қайси судья олиши кутилмоқда.
4. Янгиликлар бўлиши билан ушбу каналда пост қолдирилади.
Эътиборингиз учун раҳмат!
⚡️⚡️⚡️ #RosalesvBiden (илгари Jacob) ишини Судья Мехта кўрадиган бўлди!
Forwarded from Morrison Urena, LC
#RosalesvBiden #DV2021 Update:
This is a little complicated and I’m sorry about that. The government has made this proposal that doesn’t make sense- where the class is defined only as named plaintiffs (I don’t think that’s what Judge Mehta wants.) They also (mistakenly) believe counsel in other lawsuits have a say in the class definition.
Rafael has responded:
“There is only one DV-2021 related case with a pending Motion for Class Certification before J. Mehta - Rosales v. Biden, 1:21-cv-01874-APM. In fact, J. Mehta's order to meet and confer on a possible stipulation was only entered in Rosales. We do not need an agreement with counsel in related matters to reach a stipulation in Rosales.
With that, will the Government require the agreement between counsel in all DV-2021 related litigation to reach a stipulation as to the Rosales Motion for Class Certification?”
We are waiting for the government’s response.
This is a little complicated and I’m sorry about that. The government has made this proposal that doesn’t make sense- where the class is defined only as named plaintiffs (I don’t think that’s what Judge Mehta wants.) They also (mistakenly) believe counsel in other lawsuits have a say in the class definition.
Rafael has responded:
“There is only one DV-2021 related case with a pending Motion for Class Certification before J. Mehta - Rosales v. Biden, 1:21-cv-01874-APM. In fact, J. Mehta's order to meet and confer on a possible stipulation was only entered in Rosales. We do not need an agreement with counsel in related matters to reach a stipulation in Rosales.
With that, will the Government require the agreement between counsel in all DV-2021 related litigation to reach a stipulation as to the Rosales Motion for Class Certification?”
We are waiting for the government’s response.
Forwarded from Morrison Urena, LC
#RosalesvBiden #DV2021 Update: Pursuant to Judge's instruction, our attorneys had meet and confer call today with government where we discussed revised proposed class definition.
The government wanted us to add in a temporal limit on the eligibility for class membership, meaning DV selectees who have not submitted DS-260s by a certain date should be excluded. We found that was reasonable. They also wanted us to change "but have not been issued visas" at the end to "have not been adjudicated," which was an edit we were not comfortable with because it would exclude those who had attended interview already.
Also, the government is still opposing the class certification, which seems dumb on their part, given the court's suggestion and their alternative.
Tomorrow we are filing a joint status report with court to report back on where we are.
Here's email I sent them after the call, where I attached email showing where we tried to get them to give their position on class definition and they refused.
The government wanted us to add in a temporal limit on the eligibility for class membership, meaning DV selectees who have not submitted DS-260s by a certain date should be excluded. We found that was reasonable. They also wanted us to change "but have not been issued visas" at the end to "have not been adjudicated," which was an edit we were not comfortable with because it would exclude those who had attended interview already.
Also, the government is still opposing the class certification, which seems dumb on their part, given the court's suggestion and their alternative.
Tomorrow we are filing a joint status report with court to report back on where we are.
Here's email I sent them after the call, where I attached email showing where we tried to get them to give their position on class definition and they refused.
Forwarded from Morrison Urena, LC
2021 0724 Rosales Joint Status Report + exhibits.pdf
1.7 MB
#RosalesvBiden #DV2021 Update: Joint Status Report about Biden administration's opposition to #DV2021 immigrant class definition - is filed, with 5 exhibits.
Forwarded from Morrison Urena, LC
#RosalesvBiden #DV2021 Update.
On the issue of government's motion for clarification, Rafael let the government know:
1) we take no position on that motion and that we will oppose their proposed briefing schedule for a 3rd motion to dismiss; and
2) we are filing motion for default judgment. (which we have since filed- will download and share soon).
For clarification- Judge Mehta can and we hope will decide our pending motions for preliminary injunction and class certification prior to the filing of the government's answer.
On the issue of government's motion for clarification, Rafael let the government know:
1) we take no position on that motion and that we will oppose their proposed briefing schedule for a 3rd motion to dismiss; and
2) we are filing motion for default judgment. (which we have since filed- will download and share soon).
For clarification- Judge Mehta can and we hope will decide our pending motions for preliminary injunction and class certification prior to the filing of the government's answer.
Forwarded from Morrison Urena, LC
132 Rosales Motion for Default Judgment + proposed order.pdf
169.8 KB
#RosalesvBiden #DV2021 Update - This is the Motion for Default Judgment that Rafael filed last night. This is related to the government's failure to file answer to our second amended complaint.
For clarification: Judge Mehta can issue orders on our pending motions for preliminary injunction and class certification prior to the government filing their answer, so we do do not expect this issue will cause a delay in getting relief.
For clarification: Judge Mehta can issue orders on our pending motions for preliminary injunction and class certification prior to the government filing their answer, so we do do not expect this issue will cause a delay in getting relief.
Forwarded from Morrison Urena, LC
#RosalesvBiden #DV2021 Update: Judge Mehta has denied Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment as “unnecessary distraction,” saying “Plaintiffs' counsel's various filings, in this case and others, concerning the DV 2021 program have given this court plenty of work to do.”
Motions for Preliminary Injunction and Class Action are still pending a decision.
Motions for Preliminary Injunction and Class Action are still pending a decision.