Loja Ojeda et al v. Garland et al

Filing 13

Magistrate Judge David H. Hennessy: ORDER entered. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re #1 Complaint, filed by Jacinto Lema Mishirumbay, Maria Loja Ojeda Objections to R&R due by 11/28/2023.(King, Dawn)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS __________________________________________ ) MARIA LOJA OJEDA and ) JACINTO LEMA MISHIRUMBAY, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Civil Action No. v. ) 23-12151-DHH ) MERRICK B. GARLAND, ) United States Attorney General; ) ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, ) Secretary of United States Department of ) Homeland Security; ) UR MENDOZA JADDOU, ) Director of United States Citizenship and ) Immigration Services; ) UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND ) IMMIGRATION SERVICES and ) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ) HOMELAND SECURITY, ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION November 14, 2023 This Court recommends that Plaintiffs’ motion of voluntary dismissal be granted and that the instant action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Plaintiffs Maria Loja Ojeda and Jacinto Lema Mishirumbay brought a mandamus action on September 21, 2023, against the United States Attorney General, the Secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security, the Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the United States Department of Homeland Security (collectively, the Defendants). [Dkt. No. 1 at p. 1]. Plaintiffs sought to compel the Defendants to complete adjudication of Plaintiffs’ Form I-130, which was allegedly delayed in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Administrative Procedures Act, and the U.S. Constitution. Id. at p. 5-6. A summons was issued and returned by the Defendants. [Dkt. Nos. 5, 9]. Plaintiffs consented to jurisdiction by a Magistrate Judge on October 13, 2023, but Defendants have not yet consented. [Dkt. No. 11]. On November 13, 2023, Plaintiffs moved to voluntarily dismiss the action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 41(a)(1)(A)(i) as the underlying dispute had been resolved. [Dkt. No. 12 at p. 1]. FRCP 41(a)(1) allows a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss an action without a court order by filing either (1) a notice of dismissal before the opposing party has served either an answer or a motion for summary judgment, or (2) a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. Defendants in this action have not filed nor served an answer or a motion in response to Plaintiffs’ Complaint. Therefore, the Court recommends that the instant action be DISMISSED without prejudice as all prerequisites for dismissal pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(i) have been satisfied. This action is reassigned to a United States District Judge for final approval of this Report. /s/ David H. Hennessy David H. Hennessy United States Magistrate Judge 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?