Laureano-Gonzalez

Laureano-Gonzalez v. Main

Good Law
125 F. Supp. 60·1954 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2622
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 22, 1954No. 16660California473 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Byrne, J.

The plaintiffs are husband and wife and citizens of Mexico who illegally entered the United States on or about December 15, 1950, without valid immigration visas and without inspection.

Following the arrest of the plaintiffs,, a hearing was had before the immigration authorities on plaintiffs ‘application for voluntary departure in lieu of deportation. The result of this hearing was a decision that voluntary departure.be denied and an order for plaintiffs’ deportation. An appeal’ taken to the-Immigration Board of Appeáls was dismissed on August 27, 1953.

The critical question presented on this-motion to dismiss is whether the Attorney General is an indispensable party.

In an action to restrain the district director from deporting an alien under the asserted authority of an alleged, illegal deportation order, the Attorney General is not an indispensable party where the decree granting the relief' sought will not require him to take action. See Aguilera-Flores v. Landon, D.C., 125 F.Supp. 55 , decided by this-court on Sept. 22, 1954, on the authority of Williams v. Fanning, 332 U.S. 490 , 68 S.Ct. 188, 189 , 92 L.Ed. 95 .

A comparison of the instant case with. Aguilera-Flores v.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.