Mendez et al v. Napolitano et al
Filing
25
ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 3/10/2015. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/10/2015)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California
10
11
FERNANDO MORENO MENDEZ et al.,
Petitioners,
12
13
14
15
No. C12-06069 CRB
ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE
v.
JANET NAPOLITANO et al.,
Respondents.
/
16
17
The parties agreed in their simultaneous supplemental briefing that the Ninth Circuit’s
18
decision is res judicata here. See Resp. Supp. Br. (dkt. 23) at 4-7; Pet. Supp. Br. (dkt. 24) at
19
5. Petitioners asserted, however, that the Ninth Circuit’s decision does not foreclose claim
20
41.f in their present habeas petition. Pet. Supp. Br. at 5-6. That claim pertains to the alleged
21
failure of attorney Meeks to raise the BIA’s failure to reissue the voluntary departure order in
22
its January 29, 2009 order, and the BIA’s unilateral vacating of the voluntary departure
23
applications. Pet. (dkt. 1) ¶ 41.f. Respondents have not had an opportunity to respond to that
24
argument. Accordingly, Respondents are DIRECTED to file a response to Petitioners’
25
argument as to claim 41.f by 5:00 PM on Friday, March 20, 2015.
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: March 10, 2015
CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?