Dasilva v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services et al

Filing 38

ORDERED that the 27 motion for partial summary judgment and the 31 motion for judicial notice are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit cross motions for summary judgment on or before 5/1/2013. To the exte nt the parties intend the Court to consider assertions or arguments made in other pleadings, including prior motions or oppositions, the parties should present these assertions or arguments in the May 1 motions. FURTHER ORDERED that these motions shall be taken under advisement on 5/15/2013, without oral argument. Signed by Judge Lance M Africk on 4/19/2013. (blg)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
RAFAEL ELLWANGER DASILVA

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

No. 13-13

U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL ET AL.

SECTION I

ORDER
The only remaining claim in this case arises under the Freedom of Information Act. The
claim for injunctive relief in the form of a permanent resident card is moot, and the Court has
dismissed the claims premised on violations of the “Mandatory Access Law” and procedural due
process. The Court concludes that while the parties have briefed issues surrounding this claim, the
issues have not been presented in a way that would facilitate their resolution. For example, plaintiff’s
pending motion1 for partial summary judgment does not specifically identify objections to
defendants’ response to the FOIA request, but such objections can be found elsewhere in plaintiff’s
opposition2 to defendants’ motion to dismiss and in plaintiff’s motion3 for judicial notice of redacted
documents. While defendants have asked4 that the Court grant them summary judgment, there is no
formal cross-motion pending. Moreover, the parties may agree that certain arguments or requests
presented in the pending motions are now moot. Rather than risk assigning incorrect procedural
labels to the parties’ filings by, for example, construing the motion for judicial notice as a reply in
support of plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment, the Court has determined that the best

1

R. Doc. No. 27.
R. Doc. No. 29-2, at 13.
3
R. Doc. No. 31.
4
R. Doc. No. 33, at 9.
2

course is for the parties to file cross motions for summary judgment that consolidate their remaining
disputes.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion for partial summary judgment and the motion for judicial
notice are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall submit cross motions for summary
judgment on or before Wednesday, May 1, 2013. To the extent the parties intend the Court to
consider assertions or arguments made in other pleadings, including prior motions or oppositions,
the parties should present these assertions or arguments in the May 1 motions.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that these motions shall be taken under advisement on
Wednesday, May 15, 2013, without oral argument.

New Orleans, Louisiana, April 19, 2013.
_____________________________
LANCE M. AFRICK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE