Emami

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 FARANGIS EMAMI, et al., Case No. 18-cv-01587-JD

8 Plaintiffs,

ORDER RE DISCOVERY

v. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 117 10 KEVIN K. McALEENAN, et al., Defendants. 11

12 PARS EQUALITY CENTER, et al., Case No. 18-cv-07818-JD

13 Plaintiffs, 14 v. Re: Dkt. No. 138

15 MIKE POMPEO, et al., Defendants. 16

17 This order resolves the multiple discovery disagreements between the parties that are 18 outlined in the joint discovery report. Dkt. No. 117 (Case No. 18-1587). 19 The prior dismissal order held that plaintiffs had adequately alleged a claim under United 20 States ex rel. Accardi v. Shaughnessy, 347 U.S. 260 (1954), with respect to whether the State 21 Department has failed to abide by its own rules and procedures for the waiver program that was 22 created pursuant to Presidential Proclamation 9645. Dkt. No. 74 (Case No. 18-1587) at 13-16. 23 The allegations that were key to sustaining the claim over the government’s Rule 12(b)(6) 24 challenge included factual…