Case 1:20-cv-01419-APM Document 52 Filed 07/31/20 Page 1 of 36 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DOMINGO ARREGUIN GOMEZ et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-01419-APM DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, et al., Defendants. PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM Page i – PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Case 1:20-cv-01419-APM Document 52 Filed 07/31/20 Page 2 of 36 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 2 II. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................... 5 A. The Proclamation’s Impact on Plaintiffs ............................................................ 6 1. Proposed Immediate Relative Parent Subclass Representative ............................ 7 2. Proposed Preference Relative Subclass Representative ....................................... 7 3. Proposed Diversity Visa Subclass Representatives ............................................. 9 4. Proposed Temporary Worker Subclass Representatives .................................... 10 5. Proposed Exchange Visitor Program Subclass Representatives ........................ 10 B. The Proposed Class ............................................................................................. 11 C. Procedural History .............................................................................................. 12 III. ARGUMENT ....................................................................................................................... 12 A. The proposed class satisfies Rule 23(a)’s requirements. .................................. 13 1. The proposed class is so numerous that joinder is impracticable. ..................... 14 2. Plaintiffs’ claims present questions of law or fact common to the class. ........... 19 3. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of class and subclass members. ...... 22 4. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. ............... 25 5. The proposed class satisfies any “ascertainability” requirement. ...................... 26 B. The proposed class satisfies the requirements of Rule 23(b). .......................... 27 1. The proposed class may be certified under Rule 23(b)(2). ................................ 28 2. The proposed class may be certified under Rule 23(b)(1)(A). ........................... 29 IV. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 30 Page ii – PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Case 1:20-cv-01419-APM Document 52 Filed 07/31/20 Page 3 of 36 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Abraham v. WPX Energy Prod., LLC, 322 F.R.D. 592 (D. N.M. 2017) .................................................................................................. 1 Adair v. England, 209 F.R.D. 5 (D.D.C. 2002) .................................................................................................. 5, 29 Afghan & Iraqi Allies Under Serious Threat Because of Their Faithful Service to United States v. Pompeo, 334 F.R.D. 449 (D.D.C. 2020) ............................................................................................ 12, 22 Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997) ............................................................................................................ 24, 29 Borum v. Brentwood Village, LLC, 324 F.R.D. 1 (D.D.C. 2018) ...................................................................................................... 21 Bynum v. District of Columbia, 214 F.R.D. 27 (D.D.C. 2003) .................................................................................. 22, 23, 26, 28 Chapman v. First Index, Inc., 796 F.3d 783 (7th Cir. 2015) ....................................................................................................... 1 Coleman through Bunn v. District of Columbia, 306 F.R.D. 68 (D.D.C. 2015) ........................................................................................ 13, 14, 17 D.L. v. District of Columbia, 713 F.3d 120 (D.C. Cir. 2013) ............................................................................................ 18, 20 Damus v. Nielsen, 313 F. Supp. 3d 317 (D.D.C. 2018) ................................................................................... passim Daskalea v. Wash. Humane Soc’y, 275 F.R.D. 346 (D.D.C. 2011) .................................................................................................. 22 Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147 (1982) ............................................................................................................ 20, 22 Gen. Tel. Co. of the Nw., Inc. v. EEOC, 446 U.S. 318 (1980) .................................................................................................................. 13 Hardy v. District of Columbia, 283 F.R.D. 20 (D.D.C. 2012) .............................................................................................. 13, 21 Page iii – PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Case 1:20-cv-01419-APM Document 52 Filed 07/31/20 Page 4 of 36 Hoyte v. District of Columbia, 325 F.R.D. 485 (D.D.C. 2017) ...................................................................................... 13, 18, 25 Huashan Zhang v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 344 F. Supp. 3d 32 (D.D.C. 2018) ............................................................................................ 26 Kifafi v. Hilton Hotels Ret. Plan, 189 F.R.D. 174 (D.D.C. 1999) .................................................................................................. 14 Lightfoot v. District of Columbia, 246 F.R.D. 326 (2007) ........................................................................................................ 27, 28 Littlewolf v. Hodel, 681 F. Supp. 929 (D.D.C. 1988) ............................................................................................... 22 Marcus v. BMW of N. Am., LLC, 687 F.3d 583 (3d Cir. 2012) ...................................................................................................... 13 McCuin v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 817 F.2d 161 (1st Cir. 1987) ..................................................................................................... 14 N.S. v. Hughes, 2020 WL 2219441 (D.D.C. May 7, 2020) ...................................................................... 5, 12, 18 Nio v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 323 F.R.D. 28 (D.D.C. 2017) ................................................................................................ 5, 21 Pigford v. Glickman, 182 F.R.D. 341 (D.D.C. 1998) ............................................................................................ 21, 26 R.I.L.-R. v. Johnson, 80 F. Supp. 3d 164 (D.D.C. 2015) ............................................................................................ 12 Ramirez v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, 338 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2018) ....................................................................................... passim Robidoux v. Celani, 987 F.2d 931 (2d Cir. 1993) ...................................................................................................... 13 Shady Grove Orthopedic Assocs., P.A. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 559 U.S. 393 (2010). ....................... 11 Taylor v. D.C. Water & Sewer Auth., 241 F.R.D. 33 (D.D.C. 2007) .................................................................................................... 13 Thorpe v. District of Columbia, 303 F.R.D. 120 (D.D.C. 2014) .................................................................................................. 13 Page iv – PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION Case 1:20-cv-01419-APM Document 52 Filed 07/31/20 Page 5 of 36 Twelve John Does v. District of Columbia, 117 F.3d 571 (D.C. Cir. 1997) .................................................................................................. 24 United States v. Trucking Emp’rs Inc., 75 F.R.D. 682 (D.D.C. 1977) .................................................................................................... 23 Wagner v. Taylor, 836 F.2d 578 (D.C. Cir. 1987) .................................................................................................. 23 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338 (2011) ........................................................................................................... passim Statutes 8 U.S.C. § 1151(e) ......................................................................................................................... 16 8 U.S.C. § 1154(a) ........................................................................................................................... 3 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) ........................................................................................................................... 3 Other Authorities Annual Report of the Visa Office (FY 2019) .......................................................................... 16, 17 Presidential Proclamation 10014, 85 Fed. Reg. 23,441 (Apr. 22, 2020) .................................................................................. passim Presidential Proclamation No. 10052, 85 Fed. Reg. 38,263 (June 22, 2020) ................................................................................. passim U.S. Dep’t of State, Exchange Visitor Program, https://j1visa.state.gov/sponsors/sponsor-by-