DOCSLIB.ORG

MOTION for CLASS CERTIFICATION Plaintiffs, 13 NOTING DATE: by STIPULATION1 V

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 19 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 32 1 The Honorable James L. Robart 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 9 John Doe, Jane Doe, Jack Doe, Jason Doe, Julia Doe, Joseph Doe and James Doe, individually, 10 and on behalf of all others similarly situated; the No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR 11 Episcopal Diocese of Olympia, and the Council on American Islamic Relations-Washington, 12 MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Plaintiffs, 13 NOTING DATE: BY STIPULATION1 v. 14 ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED Donald Trump, President of The United States; 15 U.S. Department of State; Rex Tillerson, 16 Secretary of State; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; John Kelly, Secretary of 17 Homeland Security; U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Kevin McAleenan, Acting 18 Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection; and Michele James, Field Director 19 of the Seattle Field Office of U.S. Customs and 20 Border Protection, 21 Defendants. 22 23 24 25 1 The parties have stipulated, and the Court has ordered, that Defendants shall file a response to this motion within 26 fourteen (14) days of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in Hawai‘i v. Trump, and that Plaintiffs shall file a reply in support of class certification within seven (7) days after Defendants file their response. See Dkt. No. 18. MOTION FOR CLASS AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION K ELLER RO H RB AC K L. L. P. CERTIFICATION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101-3052 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 630 (2:17-cv-00178-JLR) i TELEPHONE: (206) 623-1900 Seattle, Washington 98164 FACSIMILE: (`206) 623-3384 TELEPHONE: (206) 624-2184 Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 19 Filed 04/11/17 Page 2 of 32 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 3 II. PROPOSED CLASS DEFINITIONS ........................................................................... 2 4 5 III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ....................................................................................... 3 6 A. Executive Order 13769 (EO-1) .......................................................................... 3 7 B. Executive Order 13780 (EO-2) .......................................................................... 4 8 C. Proposed Class Representatives ........................................................................ 5 9 1. Non-Immigrant Class: Plaintiffs’ Factual Backgrounds.......................... 5 10 2. Refugee Class: Plaintiffs’ Factual Claims .............................................. 6 11 IV. ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................... 7 12 A. Legal Standard .................................................................................................. 7 13 B. Plaintiffs’ Action Satisfies the Requirements of Rule 23(a). .............................. 7 14 1. The Proposed Classes Are So Numerous That Joinder Is 15 Impracticable. ........................................................................................ 7 16 2. Plaintiffs’ Claims Present Common Questions of Law and Fact. .................................................................................................... 12 17 18 3. The Claims of the Class Plaintiffs Are Typical of the Claims of the Members of the Proposed Classes. ................................. 16 19 4. The Class Plaintiffs Will Adequately Protect the Interests 20 of the Proposed Class Members, and Counsel Are Qualified to Litigate this Action. ......................................................................... 18 21 a. Class Plaintiffs ......................................................................... 18 22 b. Class Counsel .......................................................................... 19 23 24 C. Plaintiffs’ Action Satisfies the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(2). ....................... 20 25 D. Plaintiffs’ Action Satisfies the Requirements of Rule 23(b)(1). ....................... 23 26 V. CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 23 MOTION FOR CLASS AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION K ELLER RO H RB AC K L. L. P. CERTIFICATION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101-3052 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 630 (2:17-cv-00178-JLR) i TELEPHONE: (206) 623-1900 Seattle, Washington 98164 FACSIMILE: (`206) 623-3384 TELEPHONE: (206) 624-2184 Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 19 Filed 04/11/17 Page 3 of 32 1 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES 2 Page(s) 3 Cases 4 A.D. v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 5 No. 15-180, 2016 WL 3882919 (W.D. Wash. July 18, 2016) ............................................... 23 6 Amchem Prod. Inc., v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997) ........................................................................................................ 1, 20 7 Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Ret. Plans & Trust Funds, 8 133 S.Ct. 1184 (2013) ......................................................................................................... 11 9 Armstrong v. Davis, 275 F.3d 849 (9th Cir. 2001), abrogated on other grounds by Johnson v. 10 California, 543 U.S. 499 (2005) .................................................................................... 15, 17 11 Aziz v. Trump, 12 No. 17-116, 2017 WL 580855 (E.D. Va. Feb. 13, 2017) ........................................................ 3 13 Baby Neal for & by Kanter v. Casey, 43 F.3d 48 (3d Cir. 1994) .................................................................................................... 21 14 Bustamante v. Mukasey, 15 531 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2008) ............................................................................................. 13 16 In re Cooper Co. Inc., Sec. Litig., 17 254 F.R.D. 628 (C.D. Cal. 2009) ........................................................................................... 8 18 Crawford v. Marion County Election Bd., 533 U.S. 181 (2008) .............................................................................................................. 9 19 Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp., 20 657 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2011) ............................................................................................... 11 21 Erickson v. Bartell Drug Co., 22 141 F. Supp. 2d 1266 (W.D. Wash. 2001) ........................................................................... 19 23 Evon v. Law Offices of Sidney Mickell, 688 F.3d 1015 (9th Cir. 2012) ....................................................................................... 12, 18 24 Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp., 25 150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir.1998) .............................................................................................. 12 26 MOTION FOR CLASS AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION K ELLER RO H RB AC K L. L. P. CERTIFICATION OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101-3052 901 Fifth Avenue, Suite 630 (2:17-cv-00178-JLR) ii TELEPHONE: (206) 623-1900 Seattle, Washington 98164 FACSIMILE: (`206) 623-3384 TELEPHONE: (206) 624-2184 Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 19 Filed 04/11/17 Page 4 of 32 1 Harris v. Palm Springs Alpine Est., Inc., 329 F.2d 909 (9th Cir. 1964) ................................................................................................. 8 2 Hawai‘i v. Trump, 3 No. 17–50, 2017 WL 1167383 (D. Hi. Mar. 15, 2017) ....................................................... 4, 5 4 Hickey v. City of Seattle, 5 236 F.R.D. 659 (W.D. Wash. 2006) ..................................................................................... 15 6 Int’l Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, No. 17-361, 2017 WL 1018235 (D. Md. Mar. 16, 2017) ........................................................ 4 7 Jordan v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 8 669 F.2d 1311 (9th Cir. 1982), vacated on other grounds, 459 U.S. 810 (1982) ............... 8, 18 9 Just Film, Inc. v. Buono, 10 847 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2017) ............................................................................................. 16 11 Khoury v. Asher, 3 F. Supp. 3d 877 (W.D. Wash. 2014) ................................................................................. 21 12 Krzesniak v. Cendant Corp., 13 No. C 05-5156, 2007 WL 1795703 (N.D. Cal. June 20, 2007) ............................................. 17 14 LaDuke v. Nelson, 15 762 F.2d 1318 (9th Cir. 1985), amended, 796 F.2d 309 (9th Cir. 1986) ............................... 17 16 Lynch v. Rank, 604 F. Supp. 30 (N.D. Cal. 1984), aff’d, 747 F.2d 528 (9th Cir. 1984), opinion 17 amended on reh’g, 763 F.2d 1098 (9th Cir. 1985).................................................................. 8 18 Mazza v. Am. Honda Motor Co., Inc., 666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012) ............................................................................................... 12 19 McCluskey v. Trs. Of Red Dot Corp. Employee Stock Ownership Plan & Trust, 20 268 F.R.D. 670 (W.D. Wash. 2010) ....................................................................................... 8 21 Michery v. Ford Motor Co., 22 650 F. App’x 338 (9th Cir. 2016) .......................................................................................... 9 23 Nw. Immigrant Rights Project v. United States Citizenship & Immigration Servs., No. C15-0813, 2016 WL 5817078 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 5, 2016) .............................................. 8 24 Parsons v. Ryan, 25 754 F.3d 657 (9th Cir. 2014) ........................................................................................ passim 26 MOTION FOR CLASS AMERICAN
Recommended publications
  • Case 1:17-Cv-01533-TSC Document 2 Filed 08/03/17 Page 1 of 2

    Case 1:17-Cv-01533-TSC Document 2 Filed 08/03/17 Page 1 of 2

    Case 1:17-cv-01533-TSC Document 2 Filed 08/03/17 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) P.K., et al., ) on behalf of themselves and all others ) similarly situated, ) No. ------- ) Plaintiffs/Petitioners, ) ) V. ) ) REX W. TILLERSON, et al., ) ) Defendants/Respondents. ) ) PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND EMERGENCY MOTION FOR MANDAMUS RELIEF Plaintiffs hereby move this court for a preliminary injunction and for emergency mandamus relief pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P 65 and LCvR. 65.l(c). In support of their motion, Plaintiffs rely on the accompanying Memorandum, declarations, and exhibits. A proposed order is attached. STATEMENT PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 7(m) Pursuant to Local Rule 7(m), Plaintiffs' counsel unsuccessfully attempted to contact Defendants' counsel to determine if Defendants would consent to the relief requested in this motion. 1 Case 1:17-cv-01533-TSC Document 2 Filed 08/03/17 Page 2 of 2 July 31, 2017 Respectfully submitted, -~ Samer E. Khalaf (pro hac vice pending) Matthew E. Price (DC Bar# 996158) Abed A. Ayoub Max J. Minzner (pro hac vice pending) Yolanda Rondon JENNER & BLOCK LLP AMERICAN-ARAB ANTI-DISCRIMINATION 1099 New York Ave. NW Suite 900 COMMITTEE Washington, DC 20001 1705 DeSales Street, N.W., Suite 500 Tel. 202-639-6000 Washington, D.C. 20036 Fax: 202-639-6066 Tel: 202-244-2990 Email: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Karen C. Tumlin Omar C. Jadwat Esther Sung AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION NATIONAL lMMIGRA TION LAW CENTER FOUNDATION 3435 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1600 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90010 New York, NY 10004 (213) 639-3900 Tel: (212) 549-2600 [email protected] Fax: (212) 549-2654 [email protected] [email protected] Justin B.
  • Welcome to America - 2020

    Welcome to America - 2020

    CANADIAN DEFENCE LIAISON STAFF (WASHINGTON) WELCOME TO AMERICA - 2020 1 A WORD FROM THE COMMANDER OF CDLS(W) Canadian Defence État-major de liaison des Liaison Staff (Washington) Forces canadiennes (Washington) Embassy of Canada Ambassade du Canada 501 Pennsylvania Ave NW 501 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington DC USA Washington DC USA 20001-2114 20001-2114 5600-3 (COMD) 20 May 2020 WELCOME TO AMERICA Welcome to the United States! I extend to you my congratulations on being selected to represent the Cana- dian Armed Forces during your international posting. You fill a vital role herein the U.S. whether you are posted with Attaché or Support Services related duties, as an Exchange Officer, Liaison Officer or student you have a significant and important responsibility as facilitators for Canada-U.S. relations. You and your family are not only to work in the position for which you have been selected, but also as “ambassadors” of Canada and the Canadian Armed Forces. This is an important role, and one that can set the tone for other Canadians who will follow after you. An OUTCAN posting presents unique challenges and wonderful opportunities. Your posting to the United Stated will be challenging and rewarding; the opportunities at the professional, personal, and family levels are immense. I encourage you to embrace the full spectrum of opportunities open to you and your family. There are many resources available to assist you during your posting including our superb Military Family Services team. I encourage you to use these services and to raise any concerns you have with my team here at CDLS(W).
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

    Case 3:15-cv-02159-VC Document 186 Filed 01/19/18 Page 1 of 42 1 Derek W. Loeser, admitted pro hac vice Gretchen Freeman Cappio, admitted pro hac vice 2 KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 3 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101-3052 4 (206) 623-1900; Fax: (206) 623-3384 [email protected] 5 [email protected] 6 Jeffrey Lewis (Bar No. 66587) 7 KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 300 Lakeside Drive, Suite 1000 8 Oakland, CA 94612 (510) 463-3900; Fax: (510) 463-3901 9 [email protected] 10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 13 SHAHRIAR JABBARI and KAYLEE 14 HEFFELFINGER, on behalf of themselves and all No. 15-cv-02159-VC 15 others similarly situated, 16 Plaintiffs, DECLARATION OF DEREK W. LOESER IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION 17 v. FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, 18 WELLS FARGO & COMPANY and WELLS CERTIFICATION OF A SETTLEMENT FARGO BANK, N.A., CLASS, SERVICE AWARDS, AND 19 FEE/COST AWARD Defendants. 20 Date: March 22, 2018 21 Time: 10:00 a.m. Courtroom: 4, 17th Floor 22 Judge: Hon. Vince Chhabria 23 24 25 26 27 28 No. 15-cv-02159-VC DECLARATION OF DEREK W. LOESER IN SUPPORT OF FINAL APPROVAL, SERVICE AWARDS, AND FEES AND COSTS Case 3:15-cv-02159-VC Document 186 Filed 01/19/18 Page 2 of 42 1 I, Derek W. Loeser, declare as follows: 2 1. I am a partner at the law firm of Keller Rohrback L.L.P.
  • WESTERN LEGAL Hrstory

    WESTERN LEGAL Hrstory

    WESTERN LEGAL HrSTORY THE JOURNAL OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT HISTORICAL SOCIETY VOLUME 20, NUMBERS 1 & 2 2007 Western Legal History is published semiannually, in spring and fall, by the Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society, 125 S. Grand Avenue, Pasadena, California 91105, (626) 795-0266/fax (626) 229-7476. The journal explores, analyzes, and presents the history of law, the legal profession, and the courts- particularly the federal courts-in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Western Legal History is sent to members of the NJCHS as well as members of affiliated legal historical societies in the Ninth Circuit. Membership is open to all, Membership dues (individuals and institutions): Patron, $1,000 or more; Steward, $750-$999; Sponsor, $500-$749; Grantor, $250-$499; Sustaining, $100-$249; Advocate, $50-$99; Subscribing (nonmembers of the bench and bar, lawyers in practice fewer than five years, libraries, and academic institutions), $25-$49. Membership dues (law firms and corporations): Founder, $3,000 or more; Patron, $1,000-$2,999; Steward, $750-$999; Sponsor, $500-$749; Grantor, $250-$499. For information regarding membership, back issues of Western Legal History, and other society publications and programs, please write or telephone the editor. POSTMASTER: Please send change of address to: Editor Western Legal History 125 S. Grand Avenue Pasadena, California 91105 Western Legal History disclaims responsibility for statements made by authors and for accuracy of endnotes. Copyright 02007, Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society ISSN 0896-2189 The Editorial Board welcomes unsolicited manuscripts, books for review, and recommendations for the journal.
  • Western Legal History

    Western Legal History

    WESTERN LEGAL HISTORY THE JOURNAL OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT HISTORICAL SOCIETY SPECIAL ISSUE: FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY OF THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA VOLUME 28, NUMBER 2 201 Western Legal History is published semiannually, in spring and fall, by the Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society, 125 S. Grand Avenue, Pasadena, California 91105, (626) 795-0266/fax (626) 229-7476. The journal explores, analyzes, and presents the history of law, the legal profession, and the courts- particularly the federal courts-in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawai'i, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands. Western Legal History is sent to members of the NJCHS as well as members of affiliated legal historical societies in the Ninth Circuit. Membership is open to all. Membership dues (individuals and institutions): Patron, $1,000 or more; Steward, $750-$999; Sponsor, $500-$749; Grantor, $250-$499; Sustaining, $100-$249; Advocate, $50499; Subscribing (nonmembers of the bench and bar, lawyers in practice fewer than five years, libraries, and academic institutions), $25-$49. Membership dues (law firms and corporations): Founder, $3,000 or more; Patron, $1,000-$2,999; Steward, $750-$999; Sponsor, $500-$749; Grantor, $250-$499. For information regarding membership, back issues of Western Legal History, and other society publications and programs, please write or telephone the editor. POSTMASTER: Please send change of address to: Editor Western Legal History 125 S. Grand Avenue Pasadena, California 91105 Western Legal History disclaims responsibility for statements made by authors and for accuracy of endnotes. Copyright @2015, Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society ISSN 0896-2189 The Editorial Board welcomes unsolicited manuscripts, books for review, and recommendations for the journal.
  • 917 Lakeridge Way Southwest Olympia, Washington 98504 360.753.7800 Wsac.Wa.Gov

    917 Lakeridge Way Southwest Olympia, Washington 98504 360.753.7800 Wsac.Wa.Gov

    917 Lakeridge Way Southwest Olympia, Washington 98504 360.753.7800 wsac.wa.gov Immigration Classification Guide Updated: January 2016 This guide assists residence officers in determining the ability of students in various visa classifications to establish a domicile in the state of Washington and therefore be eligible for resident tuition. It provides a brief description of the visa type, duration of stay in the U.S. for the individual or dependents with the visa type, whether the individual may study in the U.S. and if so, whether the study may be part-time, full-time, or incidental to the visit, and if the individual is authorized to work in the U.S. while in the visa status. A notation – ELIGIBLE FOR RESIDENCY - in the visa field indicates persons entitled to residency for tuition purposes in Washington provided their U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) status is not inconsistent with the concept of permanency, all their attachments are to the state of Washington and they meet the durational residency requirement of one year.i This guide is based on a publication distributed by NAFSA: Association of International Educators entitled Immigration Classifications & Legal Employment of Foreign Nationals in the United States, by Gail Rawson. The complete chart in its original form may be ordered through NAFSA at http://www.nafsa.org/. Information from U.S. Government resources were used to update, verify and further clarify visa categories. Government and additional resources are listed at the end of this Guide. Users of this Guide should check the government resources listed for more detail.
  • 2020-04-30 Litigation Rules Update Summaries.Xlsx

    2020-04-30 Litigation Rules Update Summaries.Xlsx

    Litigation Rules Update Summaries Update Summary April 30, 2020: The following new Rules Sets were created: No new Rules Sets were created. The following Rules Sets were renamed: No Rules Sets were renamed. The following Rules Sets were removed: No Rules Sets were removed. The following Rules Sets were reactivated: No Rules Sets were reactivated. The following Rules Sets were revised: 8ENDA USDC ‐‐ N.D. Alabama 4APCR AK ‐‐ Rules of Appellate Procedure ‐ Criminal I3AZN AZ ‐‐ Coconino County Superior Court K3AZA AZ ‐‐ Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure 8TPA CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Percy Anderson 8TXAB CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Andre Birotte Jr. 8TWDK CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge William D. Keller 8TSVW CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Stephen V. Wilson 8TSHS CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Mag. Suzanne H. Segal 0SPJH NDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Chief Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton* 0SPHP NDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Chief Judge Phyllis Hamilton ‐ Patent 0SBLF NDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Beth Labson Freeman 0SJSW NDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Jeffrey S. White 0SJWP NDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Jeffrey S. White ‐ Patent 0SRMI NDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Mag. Robert M. Illman 9SNLS SDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Mag. Nita L. Stormes 4IUCO USDC ‐‐ District of Colorado 7A06C FL ‐‐ 6th Judicial Circuit (Pasco, Pinellas)* 7A06P FL ‐‐ 6th Judicial Circuit ‐ Pinellas County 7A08C FL ‐‐ 8th Judicial Circuit (Alachua, Baker, Bradford, Gilchrist, Levy, Union) 7A17C FL ‐‐ 17th Judicial Circuit (Broward County) 7A18B FL ‐‐ 18th Judicial Circuit ‐ Brevard County 7A18S FL ‐‐ 18th Judicial Circuit ‐ Seminole County 2EFLF FL ‐‐ Family Law Rules of Procedure 1EFAP FL ‐‐ Rules of Appellate Procedure* 2FLA2 FL ‐‐ Second Appellate District 2FLA4 FL ‐‐ Fourth Appellate District 2FLA5 FL ‐‐ Fifth Appellate District L3GBS USBC ‐‐ S.D.
  • SECSTATE WASHDC Action

    SECSTATE WASHDC Action

    MRN: 17 STATE 23338 Date/DTG: Mar 10, 2017 / 102253Z MAR 17 From: SECSTATE WASHDC Action: SOMALIA, USMISSION ROUTINE ; ALL DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS COLLECTIVE ROUTINE E.O.: 13526 TAGS: CMGT, KPAO, PTER, KHLS Captions: SENSITIVE Reference: A) 17 STATE 8708 B) 17 STATE 9516 C) 17 STATE 11004 D) 17 STATE 21026 Subject: (SBU) NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER 13780: PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES - GUIDANCE TO VISA-ISSUING POSTS 1. (SBU) Summary: On March 6, 2017, the President issued a new Executive Order, E.O. 13780, (new E.O.), entitled Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States. The new E.O. contains provisions that will impact visa adjudication and issuance procedures beginning on the new E.O.’s effective date, 12:01 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) March 16, 2017. The new E.O. rescinds its predecessor, E.O. 13769 (“old E.O.”). We are working with the Department of Justice to determine when and how we may proceed with implementing the new E.O., in light of pending litigation. All visa issuing posts should carefully review and prepare to implement this guidance effective 12:01 a.m. EDT March 16, 2017. Although posts should be prepared to implement this guidance as of that date and time, do not begin implementation until you receive authorization to do so; such authorization will be sent in a subsequent cable. Any modifications to this guidance, due to litigation or other reasons, will also be sent in a subsequent cable. Public talking points and additional operational resources will be updated and available on CA Web.
  • 2020-12-31 FC-DA Litigation Rules Update Summaries

    2020-12-31 FC-DA Litigation Rules Update Summaries

    Litigation Rules Update Summaries Update Summary December 31, 2020: The following new Rules Sets were created: CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge John W. Holcomb CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Pedro V. Castillo CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr. The following Rules Sets were renamed: No Rules Sets were renamed. The following Rules Sets were removed: No Rules Sets were removed. The following Rules Sets were reactivated: No Rules Sets were reactivated. The following Rules Sets were revised: USBC ‐‐ E.D. Arkansas USBC ‐‐ W.D. Arkansas CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Mark C. Scarsi CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Mag. Jacqueline Chooljian USDC ‐‐ S.D. California USDC ‐‐ N.D. California ‐‐ ADR NDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge William Alsup USBC ‐‐ E.D. California California Rules of Court ‐‐ Appeals California CCP and CRC CA ‐‐ Kings County Superior Court CA ‐‐ Placer County Superior Court CA ‐‐ Family Law CA ‐ California Criminal Procedure California Unlawful Detainer CA ‐‐ Office of Administrative Hearings USDC ‐‐ M.D. Georgia MA ‐‐ Rules of Civil Procedure ND ‐‐ Rules of Civil Procedure OH ‐‐ Trumbull County Court of Common Pleas ‐ General SC ‐‐ Magistrate's Court SC ‐‐ Court‐Annexed ADR Rules SD ‐‐ Rules of Civil Procedure USBC ‐‐ W.D. Texas USBC ‐‐ W.D. Texas, Austin Division USBC ‐‐ W.D. Texas, El Paso and Waco Divisions USBC ‐‐ W.D. Texas, Midland‐Odessa Divisions USBC ‐‐ W.D. Texas, San Antonio Division WA ‐‐ Chelan County Superior Court WA ‐‐ Clallam County Superior Court WA ‐‐ King County Superior Court WA ‐‐ Skagit County Superior Court WA ‐‐ Yakima County Superior Court Update Summary November 30, 2020: The following new Rules Sets were created: CDCA Standing Order ‐‐ Judge Mark C.
  • H-4 Domestic Violence Survivors and Ina § 106 Employment Authorization

    H-4 Domestic Violence Survivors and Ina § 106 Employment Authorization

    Practice Advisory | June 2021 H-4 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS AND INA § 106 EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION By Selena Amurgis, Marian Lee, & Andrew Craycroft I. Introduction Immigrant survivors of domestic violence and other serious crimes may qualify for several different forms of immigration relief, including the U visa, the T visa, and relief under the Violence Against Women Act. If the survivor is a spouse of certain nonimmigrant visa holders, they may also be able to obtain a work permit independent of their spouse. This advisory1 will provide an introduction to that option for H-1B spouses. The H-1B visa program authorizes employers in the United States to hire qualified individuals who are not otherwise authorized to work in the United States on a temporary basis. Temporary workers with H-1B visas can petition for visas for their spouses and unmarried children, known as H-4 visas. Most H-4 visa holders are ineligible to apply for employment authorization and are thus dependent on the principal H-1B visa holder for both their immigration status and economic support. This financial dependence can be used as a tool for abuse and control in relationships and exacerbate domestic violence situations. Consequently, U.S. immigration law allows domestic violence survivors who are spouses of temporary workers to apply independently for an employment authorization document (EAD). This practice advisory introduces the work permit process for abused spouses of H-1B visa holders and other nonimmigrants. It provides information on H-1B visa and application process, the H-4 spousal visa, and the eligibility criteria and application process for employment authorization for H-4 survivors of domestic abuse.
  • Type of Visa Employment Authorization Card I-Form

    Type of Visa Employment Authorization Card I-Form

    Full-time, Employment Eligible to pay as Eligible to Earn a Part-time, Type of Visa Authorization I-Form Description Application Fee Additional Information a FL Resident? Degree? Non-credit, Card Cannot attend Submit the following documents: An A-1 visa is issued to diplomatic personnel such as ambassadors, 1. Your passport showing your current Visa public ministers, career diplomatic 2. I-94 None $75 Y N Part-time only officers and consular officers, as 3. Residency documents, if eligible well as members of their immediate families. The student is eligible to attend until the date on the I-94. A-1 Visa; Submit the following documents: EAC: C01 1. A-1 Visa 2. Students' A-1 Visa or Employment Authorization Card 3. Students' I-94 Dependent of A-1 (spouse or C01 $75 Y Y Full-time/Part-time 4. Students' Passport minor child) 5. If claiming Florida Residency Status, provide documentation from principal visa holder. If the student is a dependent child, this visa status is valid until his/her 21st birthday. The student is eligible to attend until the date on the I-94. Submit the following documents: An A-2 visa is issued to accredited 1. Your passport showing your current Visa A-2 Visa; officials and employees of foreign 2. I-94 None $75 Y N Part-time only EAC: C01 governments and their immediate 3. Residency documents, if eligible families. You are able to attend until the date on your I-94. Full-time, Employment Eligible to pay as Eligible to Earn a Part-time, Type of Visa Authorization I-Form Description Application Fee Additional Information a FL Resident? Degree? Non-credit, Card Cannot attend Submit the following documents: 1.

  • Foreign Nationals in Nonimmigrant Visa Classifications Who May Be Lawfully Employed &/Or Study in the U.S

    FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY PERSONAL SERVICES PAYMENTS (F31) ATTACHMENT 8 FOREIGN NATIONALS IN NONIMMIGRANT VISA CLASSIFICATIONS WHO MAY BE LAWFULLY EMPLOYED &/OR STUDY IN THE U.S. WITH CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS Type of Visa/Description Study Restrictions Employment Restrictions A-1/ Foreign Diplomatic Personnel May engage in incidental study. Principal A-1/A-2 visa holder may be A-2 Individuals in the U.S. as employees of employed only by foreign government entity. a foreign government, e.g., ambassador, minister, diplomat, or consular officer. Dependent of A-1/A-2 Visa Holder May engage in full-time study. Spouses and unmarried dependent children of Immediate family members of foreign a foreign government official may be government officials. (Dependents also employed if they present to INS a fully carry A-1/A-2 status.) executed Form I-566 bearing the endorsement of an authorized representative of the Dept. of State, subject to any restrictions stated in the regulations or cited on the EAD. EAD is required. A-3 Employe of Foreign Government May engage in incidental study. May be employed only by foreign government Official Attendants or other personal entity. employees of foreign government officials. B-1 Visitor for Business May engage in incidental study. Foreign visitors present in the U.S. on a B-1 Individuals in the U.S. for a short time to visa may not be paid any salary, wage, engage in business activities such as honorarium, stipend, or other form of consulting with business associates, compensation for services rendered from a attending professional conferences, or U.S.