Alegre

Alegre v. Contreras

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaNovember 22, 20213:16-cv-02442California1,328 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

23 This dispute arises out of Plaintiffs’ contention that they are members of the San 24 Pasqual Band of Mission Indians (“Band”). On September 28, 2016, Plaintiffs filed their 25 original complaint with this Court, and after multiple rounds of motions and multiple 26 iterations of the Complaint, two claims of their Fourth Amended Complaint (“FAC”) 27 remain: (1) Plaintiffs’ Administrative Procedures Act claim that the Department of the 28 Interior–Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”) acted arbitrarily and capriciously by failing to properly adjudicate their enrollment applications and related issues, and (2) an accompanying declaratory judgment claim. On August 10, 2021, Defendants filed the Final Administrative Record (“FAR”) after several rounds of motions to supplement, complete, and strike the administrative record. (Doc. No. 165.) This order follows. II. DISCUSSION The Ninth Circuit recognizes certain exceptions to the general rule that reviewing courts are limited to considering only the materials in the administrative record. For claims challenging final agency action, exceptions for supplementing the administrative…

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.