Tiwari et al v. Mattis
ORDER amending its previous 192 Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment consistent with the prior Order, docket no. 192 . Signed by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (PM)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
KIRTI TIWARI, et al.,
PATRICK M. SHANAHAN, Acting
Secretary, United States Department of
Defense, in his official capacity,
Upon reconsideration sua sponte, the Court hereby AMENDS its previous Order
entered January 31, 2019, docket no. 192, as follows:
Paragraph 7 and footnote 29 in the “Conclusion,” on page 31 of the Order,
are AMENDED to read:
The Court ENTERS the following permanent injunction: Defendant and
the United States Department of Defense are hereby ENJOINED from requiring, in the
absence of individualized suspicion, a biennial series of National Intelligence Agency
Checks for continuous monitoring or security clearance eligibility purposes with respect
to any plaintiff;29 and
The Court DECLINES to certify a class because the Court is satisfied that entry of this
permanent injunction will operate in favor of all MAVNI personnel who are similarly situated to
22 plaintiffs, namely any citizen affiliated with the DoD who accessed into the United States Army
ORDER - 1
With the changes indicated above, the Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment
2 consistent with the prior Order, docket no. 192, to send a copy of this Order and the
3 Judgment to all counsel of record, and to CLOSE this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 14th day of February, 2019.
Thomas S. Zilly
United States District Judge
19 through the MAVNI program after February 12, 2012, and before September 30, 2016. See
DiFrancesco v. Fox, 2019 WL 145627 at *2-*3 (D. Mont. Jan. 9, 2019) (ruling that, because “all
20 potential class members . . . would benefit from an injunction issued on behalf of the individually
named plaintiffs,” certification of a class would serve “[n]o useful need or purpose,” and that
21 “[t]he costs and complexities associated with maintaining a class action outweigh the benefits
class certification is intended to provide” (citing James v. Ball, 613 F.2d 180, 186 (9th Cir.
1979), rev’d on other grounds, 451 U.S. 355 (1981))); see also Davis v. Smith, 607 F.2d 535,
22 540 (2d Cir. 1978).
ORDER - 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?