Kalule v. Maurer

Filing 4

ORDER re: 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order filed by Isaac Kalule, Set Hearings:Non-Evidentiary Hearing set for 5/23/2006 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom A 901 before Judge Marcia S. Krieger. The Respondent shall file a Return to the Petition on or before Friday, May 26, 2006. Signed by Judge Marcia S. Krieger on 5/19/06. (erv, )

Kalule v. Maurer

Doc. 4

Case 1:06-cv-00936-MSK

Document 4

Filed 05/19/2006

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Honorable Marcia S. Krieger Civil Action No. 06-cv-00936-MSK-BNB ISSAC KALULE, Petitioner, v. DOUGLAS MAURER, Acting District Director, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Respondent. ______________________________________________________________________________ ORDER SETTING HEARING AND DIRECTING RESPONSE ______________________________________________________________________________ THIS MATTER comes before the Court pursuant to the Petitioner' Petitioner for s Issuance of an Emergency Temporary Restraining Order (# 2). The Respondent shall file a Return to the Petition on or before Friday, May 26, 2006. The Court will conduct a non-evidentiary hearing on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 at 10:00 a.m. for the purpose of determining whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary. At the hearing, counsel shall be familiar with and prepared to address generallly all issues presented in the Petition and request for Temporary Restraining Order, and shall be specifically prepared to address the following issues: 1. Whether a stay of deportation must be sought from United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit and the Board of Immigration Appeals where appeals are currently pending? Whether an alleged violation of 8 C.F.R. § 208.6 in the circumstances presented here gives rise to a independent

2.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:06-cv-00936-MSK

Document 4

Filed 05/19/2006

Page 2 of 2

claim for violation of Due Process, or whether the matter is simply a basis for seeking to reopen the asylum adjudication and/or appeal any such denial of reopening to the Court of Appeals? 3. If an alleged violation of 8 C.F.R. § 208.6 gives rise to an independent claim for violation of Due Process, what is the appropriate forum for adjudication of such a claim?

Dated this 19th day of May, 2006 BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger United States District Judge