Motaghedi

Motaghedi v. Blinken

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaSeptember 2, 20201:19-cv-01466California713 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SEYED AMIN SAM MOTAGHEDI, et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-01466-NONE-SKO

Plaintiffs,

ORDER COMPELLING DEFENDANT

TO COMPLY WITH SCHEDULING v. ORDER, VACATING HEARING, AND DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MICHAEL R. POMPEO, et al., PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO COMPEL 15 Defendants. (Docs. 66, 68)

_____________________________________/

18 I. BACKGROUND On October 15, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging that Defendants withheld adjudications of case-by-case waivers of Presidential Proclamation 9645, Enhancing Vetting Capabilities and Processes for Detecting Attempted Entry into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public-Safety Threats. (See Doc. 1 ¶ 1.) Plaintiffs raise claims under the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as claims for mandamus relief, deprivation of procedural due process, and Equal Protection under the Fifth Amendment. (See generally Doc. 1.) The Court entered a Scheduling…

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.