Kashannejad v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services et al

Filing 202

ORDER re 198 , 199 , 200 , 201 re Parties' Status Reports. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 4/15/2013. (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/15/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 JAMSHID S. KASHANNEJAD, 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C-11-2228 EMC Plaintiff, ORDER RE PARTIES’ STATUS REPORTS v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, et al., (Docket Nos. 198-201) 12 13 Defendants. ___________________________________/ 14 15 Plaintiff has filed two status reports in which he essentially asks the Court to delay closure of 16 the case so that he may obtain permission from authorities in Iran to leave the country. Having 17 considered Plaintiff’s status reports, as well as Defendants’ responsive status reports, the Court 18 hereby rules as follows. 19 1. To the extent Plaintiff argues that Defendants have failed to comply with the Court’s 20 order of April 3, 2013, the Court rejects that argument. First, the Court never required Defendants to 21 submit any evidence regarding their contact with Emirates and CBP. See Docket No. 197 (order). 22 Second, Defendants have now offered proof that they did contact Emirates and CBP. See Docket 23 No. 199 (status report). That Emirates may not have responded to Defendants is immaterial. 24 Finally, Plaintiff’s second status report (not to mention Defendants’) establishes that there was no 25 problem with him boarding the plane from the airline’s perspective. The only reason why Plaintiff 26 did not board the plane was because he was purportedly told, either by the “passport police” or the 27 “airport police” that he could not leave Iran without the permission of Iranian authorities (which was 28 apparently consistent with what he was told by an Iranian attorney). But see Docket No. 201 (Ex. 1) 1 (e-mail, dated April 14, 2013, from B. Afshar to V. Lawrence, et al., stating that “I have also 2 checked with immigration office at the airport” but that Plaintiff was “not referred to immigration 3 gates and there is no record for manual rejection as they don’t keep any record for that,” although 4 “there is a possibility that his name was in [the immigration office’s] manual list”). 5 6 7 2. The evidence of record establishes that Defendants did all that was necessary to ensure that Plaintiff could travel on April 14, 2013, on Emirates. 3. Since approximately September 2010, Plaintiff has been aware of the fact that he 8 signed a statement “confess[ing] that he had left [Iran] illegally, or without permission.” Docket No. 9 198 (Pl.’s Status Report at 2). Since at least February 26, 2013, Plaintiff has been specifically aware that his attempt to leave Iran could be a problem because of this confession. See Docket No. 186 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 (Pl.’s Status Report at 3-4). Since March 13, 2013, Plaintiff has known that the Court would close 12 the file in the case on April 15, 2013. See Docket No. 194 (order). Yet in spite of all of the above, 13 between March 4, 2013 (i.e., the date Plaintiff purchased a ticket from Emirates) and April 5, 2013, 14 Plaintiff did nothing to address the problem with his leaving Iran based on Iranian law. Plaintiff did 15 not consult with an attorney about the issue until April 6, 2013, approximately a week before his 16 date of travel. Based on Plaintiff’s own evidence, had he acted in a more timely fashion, this 17 problem could have been cured in 10 working days. See Docket No. 198 (Pl.’s Decl. ¶ 3). 18 4. Because Plaintiff’s inability to return to the United States on April 14, 2013, was a 19 result of his own actions (or rather inactions) and not Defendants, the Court declines Plaintiff’s 20 requested relief. Per the Court’s prior orders, the Clerk of the Court is instructed to enter a 21 final judgment in favor of Plaintiff and close the file in the case. Defendants are discharged 22 from any further obligation to assist Plaintiff in his return to the United States. See Docket 23 Nos. 194, 197 (orders). 24 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 15, 2013 26 _________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States District Judge 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?