State of Hawaii v. Trump

Filing 57

Joint MOTION for Entry of Proposed Briefing Schedule Neal Katyal appearing for Plaintiffs Ismail Elshikh, State of Hawaii (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Katyal, Neal)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI‘I STATE OF HAWAI‘I and ISMAIL ELSHIKH, Plaintiffs, v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-00050capacity as President of the United States; DKW-KJM U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; JOHN F. KELLY, in his official capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE; REX TILLERSON, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants. [PROPOSED] BRIEFING SCHEDULE ORDER Upon consideration of the parties’ Joint Motion for Entry of Proposed Briefing Schedule Order, the files and records herein, and good cause appearing therefor; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiffs will file their Second Amended Complaint, Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, and any declarations in support thereof on March 8, 2017. 2. The Government will file its Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order by 6 AM Hawaii Standard Time on March 13, 2017. 3. Plaintiffs will file a Reply by 12 Noon Hawaii Standard Time on March 14, 2017. 4. Both parties will appear at a hearing in this Court with telephonic access available on the morning of March 15, 2017, at __ AM (Hawaii Standard Time). 5. Plaintiffs may file a brief of up to 12,000 words in support of their Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, and the Government may file a brief of up to 12,000 words in opposition to that motion. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai‘i, ___________. _______________________ Derrick K. Watson U.S. District Judge State of Hawai‘i v. Trump, et al., Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-00050-DKW-KJM; [Proposed] BRIEFING SCHEDULE ORDER

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?