U.S. District Court United States District Court for the Western District of Washington (Seattle)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:17-cv-01707-JLR

Jewish Family Service of Seattle et al v. Trump et al Assigned to: Judge James L. Robart Lead case: 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Member case: (View Member Case) Cause: 05:702 Administrative Procedure Act

Date Filed: 11/13/2017 Date Terminated: 11/13/2019 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 465 Other Immigration Actions Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant

Plaintiff Jewish Family Service of Seattle

represented by Abigail E. Davis 4 TIMES SQUARE 40-310 NEW YORK, NY 10036 212-735-3579 Email: abigail.sheehan@probonolaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

David J. Burman PERKINS COIE (SEA) 1201 3RD AVE STE 4900 SEATTLE, WA 98101-3099 206-359-8000 Fax: 206-359-9000 Email: dburman@perkinscoie.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Deepa Alagesan INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT (NY) ONE BATTERY PARK PLAZA, 4TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10004 516-838-7044 Fax: 929-999-8119 Email: dalagesan@refugeerights.org

LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet HIAS 1300 SPRING STREET STE 500 SILVER SPRING, MD 20912 301-844-7300 Email: liz.sweet@hias.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT (GA) PO BOX 170208 ATLANTA, GA 30317 516-701-4233 Fax: 929-999-8119 Email: jcox@refugeerights.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER 3450 WILSHIRE BLVD #108-62 LOS ANGELES, CA 90010 213-639-3900 Email: tumlin@nilc.org TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT (NY) ONE BATTERY PARK PLAZA, 4TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10004 516-838-1975

Fax: 929-999-8119 Email: kmeyer@refugeerights.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar 4 TIMES SQUARE 40-300 NEW YORK, NY 10036 212-735-2235 Email: lauren.aguiar@probonolaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT (NY) ONE BATTERY PARK PLAZA, 4TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10004 516-838-1655 Fax: 929-999-8119 Email: levarts@refugeerights.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT (NY) ONE BATTERY PARK PLAZA, 4TH FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10004 516-701-4620 Fax: 929-999-8119 Email: mhirose@refugeerights.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield HIAS 1300 SPRING STREET

SUITE 500 SILVER SPRING, MD 20910 301-844-7267 Email: mark.hetfield@hias.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT PO BOX 2291 FAIR OAKS, CA 95628 916-546-6125 Email: mkeaney@refugeerights.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich 4 TIMES SQUARE 41-408 NEW YORK, NY 10036 212-735-2775 Email: mollie.kornreich@probonolaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Tyler S. Roberts PERKINS COIE (SEA) 1201 3RD AVE STE 4900 SEATTLE, WA 98101-3099 206-359-6312 Email: troberts@perkinscoie.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER 3450 WILSHIRE BLVD. #108-62 LOS ANGELES, CA 90010

Plaintiff
Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley

213-639-3900 Email: sung@nilc.org TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar PERKINS COIE (SEA) 1201 3RD AVE STE 4900 SEATTLE, WA 98101-3099 206-359-3316 Email: LStaniar@perkinscoie.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Allen Vaught

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Afkab Mohamed Hussein

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff John Doe 1

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff John Doe 2

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff John Doe 3

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Jane Doe 4

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Jane Doe 5

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Jane Doe 6

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
John Doe 7 individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Abigail E. Davis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
David J. Burman (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Deepa Alagesan (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elizabeth G Sweet (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Justin B. Cox (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Karen C. Tumlin (See above for address)

TERMINATED: 11/02/2018 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Kathryn C. Meyer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lauren E Aguiar (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Linda Evarts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mariko Hirose (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark J. Hetfield (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melissa S. Keaney (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mollie M Kornreich (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Tyler S. Roberts (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Esther Sung (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/17/2019 PRO HAC VICE
Lauren Watts Staniar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Donald J Trump in his official capacity as President of the United States
Defendant US Department of Homeland Security

represented by Joseph C Dugan US DEPT OF JUSTICE CIVIL DEVISION, FEDERAL PROGRAMS BRANCH 1100 L STREET, NW, ROOM 11212 WASHINGTON, DC 20005 202-514-3259 Email: Joseph.Dugan@usdoj.gov TERMINATED: 02/27/2019
Kevin Snell US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL PROGRAMS BRANCH 20 MASSACHUSETTS AVE NW ROOM 6108 WASHINGTON, DC 20530 202-305-0924 Email: Kevin.Snell@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph C Dugan (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/27/2019
Kevin Snell

Defendant Elaine Duke in her official capacity as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security
Defendant US Department of State
Defendant Rex W Tillerson in his official capacity as Secretary of State
Defendant Office of the Director of National Intelligence
Defendant Daniel Coats in his official capacity as Acting Director of National Intelligence

(See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph C Dugan (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/27/2019
Kevin Snell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph C Dugan (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/27/2019
Kevin Snell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph C Dugan (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/27/2019
Kevin Snell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph C Dugan (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/27/2019
Kevin Snell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph C Dugan (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/27/2019

Amicus Amici Curiae
Amicus Muslim Advocates

Kevin Snell (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael C Subit FRANK FREED SUBIT & THOMAS 705 2ND AVE STE 1200 SEATTLE, WA 98104-1729 206-682-6711 Fax: 206-682-0401 Email: msubit@frankfreed.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Amir Ali RODERICK & SOLANGE MACARTHUR JUSTICE CENTER 718 7TH ST NW WASHINGTON, DC 20001 202-869-3434 Email: amir.ali@macarthurjustice.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Aziz Huq MUSLIM ADVOCATES PO BOX 66408 WASHINGTON, DC 20035 202-897-2622 Email: aziz.huq@gmail.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Johnathan J Smith MUSLIM ADVOCATES PO BOX 34440 WASHINGTON, DC 20043 202-897-2622 Email:

Amicus The Roderick & Solange MacArthur Justice Center
Amicus

johnathan@muslimadvocates.org TERMINATED: 02/01/2019 LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE
Joseph P. Hoag DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE (SEA) 1201 THIRD AVENUE STE 2200 SEATTLE, WA 98101-3045 206-757-8299 Email: JosephHoag@dwt.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Matthew W Callahan MUSLIM ADVOCATES PO BOX 34440 WASHINGTON, DC 20043 202-897-2622 Email: matthew@muslimadvocates.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Sirine Shebaya MUSLIM ADVOCATES PO BOX 34440 WASHINGTON, DC 20043 202-897-2622 Email: sirine@muslimadvocates.org LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joseph P. Hoag (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Advocates for Youth
Amicus Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law
Amicus Judge David L Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law
Amicus Mississippi Center for Justice
Amicus National Center for Lesbian Rights
Amicus People for the American Way Foundation
Amicus Southern Coalition for Social Justice
Amicus Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs

represented by Michael C Subit (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael C Subit (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael C Subit (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael C Subit (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael C Subit (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael C Subit (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael C Subit (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael C Subit (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Dat e

#

Docket Text

Fil ed

11/ 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to party

13/

John Doe 1(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to party John Doe

201 2(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to party John Doe 3(pty:pla),

7

Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to party Jane Doe 4(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren

Watts Staniar added to party Jane Doe 5(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar

added to party Jane Doe 6(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to party

John Doe 7(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to party Afkab Mohamed

Hussein(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to party Jewish Family

Service of Seattle(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to party Jewish

Family Services of Silicon Valley(pty:pla), Attorney Lauren Watts Staniar added to

party Allen Vaught(pty:pla), filed by Allen Vaught, Jane Doe 4, Jewish Family

Service of Seattle, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, Jewish Family

Services of Silicon Valley, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, John Doe 3, John Doe 7.

(Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Summons Donald Trump, # 3 Summons

Department of Homeland Security, # 4 Summons Elaine Duke, # 5 Summons U.S.

Department of State, # 6 Summons Rex W. Tillerson, # 7 Summons Office of the

Director of National Intelligence, # 8 Summons Daniel Coats)(Staniar, Lauren)

(Receipt 0981-5088258) Modified on 11/13/2017 (vb). (Entered: 11/13/2017)

11/ 2 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1.

13/

Filed by John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6,

201 John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish

7

Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 3 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 7.1.

13/

Filed by John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6,

201 John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish

7

Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 4 MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym , filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe

13/

2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed

201 Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon

7

Valley, Allen Vaught. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 11/13/2017,

(Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/13/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of John Doe 1 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

13/

Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 4 MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 6 DECLARATION of John Doe 2 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

13/

Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 4 MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 7 DECLARATION of John Doe 3 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

13/

Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 4 MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 8 DECLARATION of Jane Doe 4 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

13/

Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 4 MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 9 DECLARATION of Jane Doe 5 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

13/

Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 4 MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 1 DECLARATION of Jane Doe 6 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

13/ 0 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 4 MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 1 DECLARATION of John Doe 7 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

13/ 1 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 4 MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/13/2017)

11/ 1 NOTICE of Related Case(s) 2:17-cv-00178 and 2:17-cv-00141, by Plaintiffs John

14/ 2 Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7,

201 Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services

7

of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught. (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/14/2017)

11/ 1 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Abigail E. Davis FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 3 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091722 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 1 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Deepa Alagesan FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 4 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091737 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 1 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Elizabeth Sweet FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 5 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091740 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 1 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Esther Sung FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO

15/ 6 HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane

201 Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of

7

Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee Paid) Receipt

No. 0981-5091747 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 1 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Justin B. Cox FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO

15/ 7 HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane

201 Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of

7

Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee Paid) Receipt

No. 0981-5091750 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 1 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Karen C. Tumlin FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 8 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091753 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 1 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Kathryn C. Meyer FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 9 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091764 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Lauren E. Aguiar FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 0 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091770 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Linda Evarts FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO

15/ 1 HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane

201 Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of

7

Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee Paid) Receipt

No. 0981-5091774 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Mariko Hirose FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO

15/ 2 HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane

201 Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of

7

Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee Paid) Receipt

No. 0981-5091777 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Mark J. Hetfield FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 3 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091778 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Melissa S. Keaney FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 4 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091796 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Mollie M. Kornreich FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

15/ 5 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Fee

Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5091804 (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 ORDER re 13 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice,. The Court ADMITS

15/ 6 Attorney Abigail E. Davis for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 ORDER re 14 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice,. The Court ADMITS

15/ 7 Attorney Deepa Alagesan for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to

be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 PRAECIPE re 15 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, by Plaintiffs John

15/ 8 Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7,

201 Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services

7

of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 2 PRAECIPE re 23 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, by Plaintiffs John

15/ 9 Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7,

201 Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services

7

of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 15 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice,. The Court ADMITS

15/ 0 Attorney Elizabeth G Sweet for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 16 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice,. The Court ADMITS

15/ 1 Attorney Esther Sung for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe

201 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen Vaught by

Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 17 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice,. The Court ADMITS

15/ 2 Attorney Justin B. Cox for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe

201 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen Vaught by

Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 18 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice,. The Court ADMITS

15/ 3 Attorney Karen C. Tumlin for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 19 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice,. The Court ADMITS

15/ 4 Attorney Kathryn C. Meyer for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 20 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS

15/ 5 Attorney Lauren E Aguiar for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 21 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS

15/ 6 Attorney Linda Evarts for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe

201 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen Vaught by

Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 22 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS

15/ 7 Attorney Mariko Hirose for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 23 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS

15/ 8 Attorney Mark J. Hetfield for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 3 ORDER re 24 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS

15/ 9 Attorney Melissa S. Keaney for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

201 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 4 ORDER re 25 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS

15/ 0 Attorney Mollie M Kornreich for Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3,

201 Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and Allen

Vaught by Clerk William M McCool. No document associated with this docket

entry, text only.

NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to

be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/

Judge Ricardo S Martinez added. (RE) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

15/

201

7

11/ 4 Summons(es) electronically issued as to defendant(s) Daniel Coats, Elaine Duke,

15/ 1 Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Rex W Tillerson, Donald Trump,

201 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Department of State. (Attachments:

7

# 1 Summons-Department of Homeland Security, # 2 Summons-Elaine Duke,

# 3 Summons-Department of State, # 4 Summons-Tillerson, # 5 Summons-National

Intelligence, # 6 Summons-Coats)(RE) (Entered: 11/15/2017)

11/ 4 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction , filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2,

16/ 2 John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed

201 Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon

7

Valley, Allen Vaught. Oral Argument Requested. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed

Order) Noting Date 12/8/2017, (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 4 DECLARATION of David J. Burman filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2,

16/ 3 John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed

201 Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon

7

Valley, Allen Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Attachments:

# 1 Exhibit A-I, # 2 Exhibit J-R, # 3 Exhibit S-JJ, # 4 Exhibit KK-LL, # 5 Exhibit

MM-BBB)(Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 4 DECLARATION of Casey Smith filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

16/ 4 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Attachments:

# 1 Exhibit)(Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 4 DECLARATION of Lara Finkbeiner filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2,

16/ 5 John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed

201 Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon

7

Valley, Allen Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren)

(Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 4 DECLARATION of Former National Security Officials filed by Plaintiffs John Doe

16/ 6 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab

201 Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of

7

Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar,

Lauren) (Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 4 DECLARATION of Alex Nowrasteh filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2,

16/ 7 John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed

201 Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon

7

Valley, Allen Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren)

(Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 4 DECLARATION of Afkab Mohamed Hussein filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John

16/ 8 Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab

201 Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of

7

Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar,

Lauren) (Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 4 DECLARATION of Allen R. Vaught filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2,

16/ 9 John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed

201 Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon

7

Valley, Allen Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren)

(Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of Rabbi Berkovitz CEO of Jewish Family Service of Seattle filed

16/ 0 by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe

201 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish

7

Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary

Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of Mindy Berkowitz Executive Director of Jewish Family

16/ 1 Services of Silicon Valley filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3,

201 Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

7

Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught

re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered: 11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of John Doe 1 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

16/ 2 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of John Doe 2 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

16/ 3 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of John Doe 3 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

16/ 4 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of Jane Doe 4 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

16/ 5 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of Jane Doe 5 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

16/ 6 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of Jane Doe 6 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

16/ 7 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/16/2017)

11/ 5 DECLARATION of John Doe 7 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

16/ 8 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/16/2017)

11/ 5 AFFIDAVIT of Mailing of Summons and Complaint to All Defendants on

17/ 9 11/16/2017, filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4,

201 Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family

7

Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught. (Staniar,

Lauren) (Entered: 11/17/2017)

11/ 6 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane

20/ 0 Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish

201 Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught

7

re 55 Declaration, 45 Declaration, 50 Declaration, 47 Declaration, 58 Declaration, 4

4 Declaration, 53 Declaration, 49 Declaration, 52 Declaration, 51 Declaration, 46 D

eclaration, 57 Declaration, 43 Declaration, 56 Declaration, 54 Declaration, 48 Decla

ration, 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) (Entered:

11/20/2017)

11/ 6 MINUTE ORDER transferring case as related to C17-178JLR and C17-141JLR to

20/ 1 Judge James L. Robart for all further proceedings. All future filings shall contain the

201 Case No. C17-1707JLR. The Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez is no longer assigned

7

to this case. Authorized by Judge Ricardo S Martinez. (PM) (Entered: 11/20/2017)

11/

Noting Date Reset per direction of chambers re 4 MOTION to Proceed Under

21/

Pseudonym: Noting Date is 12/1/2017. (PM) (Entered: 11/21/2017)

201 7

11/ 6 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING CONSOLIDATION re related action

21/ 2 of Doe, et al., v. Trump, et al., C17-0178JLR. Plaintiffs and Defendants to file

201 separate memorandum no later than 11/29/2017. Signed by Judge James L. Robart.

7

(PM) (Entered: 11/21/2017)

11/ 6 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Joseph Dugan on behalf of Defendants Daniel

24/ 3 Coats, Elaine Duke, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Rex W

201 Tillerson, Donald Trump, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Department

7

of State. (Dugan, Joseph) (Entered: 11/24/2017)

11/ 6 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER Re Scheduling Regarding Preliminary 27/ 4 Injunction by parties re 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction (Staniar, Lauren) 201 (Entered: 11/27/2017) 7

11/ 6 RESPONSE, by Defendants Daniel Coats, Elaine Duke, Office of the Director of

27/ 5 National Intelligence, Rex W Tillerson, Donald Trump, U.S. Department of

201 Homeland Security, U.S. Department of State, to 4 MOTION to Proceed Under

7

Pseudonym . (Dugan, Joseph) (Entered: 11/27/2017)

11/ 6 STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING SCHEDULE ON

27/ 7 PLAINTIFFS' 42 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction. Defendants' opposition due

201 12/7/2017; Plaintiffs' reply due 12/13/2017. The Clerk is directed to renote the

7

motion 42 to 12/13/2017. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM) (Entered:

11/28/2017)

11/ 6 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Kevin Snell on behalf of Defendants Daniel

28/ 6 Coats, Elaine Duke, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Rex W

201 Tillerson, Donald Trump, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Department

7

of State. (Snell, Kevin) (Entered: 11/28/2017)

11/ 6 ORDER granting Doe Plaintiffs' 4 Motion proceed under pseudonym. Signed by 28/ 8 Judge James L. Robart. (PM) (Entered: 11/28/2017) 201 7

11/ 6 STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER Regarding Consolidation And 29/ 9 Scheduling For Further Proceedings by parties (Snell, Kevin) (Entered: 201 11/29/2017) 7

11/ 7 NOTICE OF JOINDER Joining the Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Doe v. 29/ 0 Trump Dkt. #45 in C17-178JLR; filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John
Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

7

Vaught. (Staniar, Lauren) Modified on 11/30/2017 to cite case and docket number

of motion for preliminary injunction re: C17-78JLR, Dkt. #45 (PM). (Entered:

11/29/2017)

11/ 7 STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING CONSOLIDATION AND

29/ 1 SCHEDULING FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS re consolidation of case with

201 C17-178 JLR, Doe v. Trump. A hearing to address issues raised in both Jewish

7

Family Service and Doe is set for 12/21/2017 at 9:00 a.m. Signed by Judge James L.

Robart. (PM) (Entered: 11/29/2017)

11/ 7 MINUTE ORDER re C17-0178JLR and C17-1707: Pursuant to the parties'

29/ 2 stipulations, these cases are hereby consolidated. All future pleadings or other

201 filings in either action shall be filed in Case No. C17-0178JLR. All future pleadings

7

or other filings in the consolidated case shall identify in the caption whether the

pleading or filing pertains to one or both of the cases. Authorized by Judge James L.

Robart. (PM) (Entered: 11/29/2017)

11/ 7 NOTIFICATION REGARDING PROPOSED VIDEO RECORDING. All parties

30/ 3 have consented to the video recording of the in-court hearing on Thursday,

201 12/21/2017 at 9:00 a.m. Unless otherwise ordered by the presiding judge, the

7

proceeding will be video recorded as part of the CAMERAS Pilot Project. (AD)

(Entered: 11/30/2017)

12/ 7 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Sirine Shebaya FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO

04/ 4 HAC VICE for Plaintiff Jewish Family Service of Seattle Amicus Party Muslim

201 Advocates (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5113656 (Hoag, Joseph) Modified on

7

12/5/2017 to correct name of party (PM). (Entered: 12/04/2017)

12/ 7 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Armir H. Ali FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO

04/ 5 HAC VICE for Plaintiff Jewish Family Service of Seattle Amicus Party Roderick &

201 Solange MacArthur Justice Center (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5113765 (Hoag,

7

Joseph) Modified on 12/5/2017 to correct name of party (PM). (Entered:

12/04/2017)

12/ 7 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Aziz Huq FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR PRO HAC

04/ 6 VICE for Plaintiff Jewish Family Service of Seattle Amicus Party Muslim

201 Advocates (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5113782 (Hoag, Joseph) Modified on

7

12/5/2017 to correct name of party (PM). (Entered: 12/04/2017)

12/ 7 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Johnathan J. Smith FOR LEAVE TO APPEAR

04/ 7 PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff Jewish Family Service of Seattle Amicus Party

201 Muslim Advocates (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5113802 (Hoag, Joseph) Modified

7

on 12/5/2017 to correct name of party (PM). (Entered: 12/04/2017)

12/ 7 APPLICATION OF ATTORNEY Matthew W. Callahan FOR LEAVE TO

04/ 8 APPEAR PRO HAC VICE for Plaintiff Jewish Family Service of Seattle Amicus

201 Party Muslim Advocates (Fee Paid) Receipt No. 0981-5113817 (Hoag, Joseph)

7

Modified on 12/5/2017 to correct name of party (PM). Added PHV attorney's name

on 12/5/2017 (DS). (Entered: 12/04/2017)

12/ 7 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Michael C Subit on behalf of Amicus Amici 04/ 9 Curiae. (Subit, Michael) (Entered: 12/04/2017) 201 7

12/ 8 Stipulated MOTION for Leave to File Amici Curiae Brief, filed by Amicus Amici

04/ 0 Curiae National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Advocates for

201 Youth, Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Judge David L.

7

Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, Mississippi Center for Justice, National

Center for Lesbian Rights, People for the American Way Foundation, Southern

Coalition for Social Justice, and Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights

and Urban Affairs. (Attachments: # 1 Amici Curiae Brief, # 2 Proposed Order)

Noting Date 12/4/2017, (Subit, Michael) Modified on 12/5/2017 to add names of

parties (PM). (Entered: 12/04/2017)

12/ 8 MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Amici Muslim Advocates and the MacArthur 04/ 1 Justice Center in Support of Preliminary Injunction, filed by Amicus Amici Curiae. 201 Noting Date 12/4/2017, (Hoag, Joseph) (Entered: 12/04/2017) 7

12/ 8 Amici Curiae BRIEF re 81 MOTION for Leave to File Brief of Amici Muslim 04/ 2 Advocates and the MacArthur Justice Center in Support of Preliminary 201 Injunction by Amicus Amici Curiae (Hoag, Joseph) (Entered: 12/04/2017) 7

12/ 8 ORDER re 74 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS 05/ 3 Attorney Sirine Shebaya for Amicus Party Muslim Advocates, by Clerk William M 201 McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only. 7
NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 12/05/2017)

12/ 8 ORDER re 75 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS 05/ 4 Attorney Amir Ali for Amicus Party Muslim Advocates, by Clerk William M 201 McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only. 7
NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to

be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 12/05/2017)

12/ 8 ORDER re 76 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS 05/ 5 Attorney Aziz Huq for Amicus Party Muslim Advocates, by Clerk William M 201 McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only. 7
NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 12/05/2017)

12/ 8 ORDER re 77 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS 05/ 6 Attorney Jonathan J Smith for Amicus Party Muslim Advocates, by Clerk William 201 M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only. 7
NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 12/05/2017)

12/ 8 ORDER re 78 Application for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. The Court ADMITS 05/ 7 Attorney Matthew W Callahan for Amicus Party Muslim Advocates, by Clerk 201 William M McCool. No document associated with this docket entry, text only. 7
NOTE TO COUNSEL: Local counsel agrees to sign all filings and to be prepared to handle the matter, including the trial thereof, in the event the applicant is unable to be present on any date scheduled by the court, pursuant to LCR 83.1(d).(DS) (Entered: 12/05/2017)

12/ 8 ORDER re Defendants' 93 (in 2:17-cv-00178-JLR) MOTION for Reconsideration;

29/ 8 the court ORDERS Plaintiffs in the consolidated cases to file a joint response to

201 Defendants' motion; Responses due no later than 1/4/2018 at 12:00 p.m. Signed by

7

Judge James L. Robart. (SWT) (Entered: 12/29/2017)

05/ 8 (PLEASE DISREGARD. Refiled at Dkt. 92 and in C17-178, Dkt. #131)

03/ 9 MOTION to Reinstate their Cross-Motion for Limited Expedited Discovery on

201 Compliance with Preliminary Injunction, filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2,

8

John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed

Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon

Valley, Allen Vaught. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 5/11/2018,

(Keaney, Melissa) Modified on 5/4/2018 (SWT). (Entered: 05/03/2018)

05/ 9 (PLEASE DISREGARD. Refiled at Dkt. 93 and in C17-178, Dkt. #132) 03/ 0 DECLARATION of John Doe 1 filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John
Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

201 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

8

Vaught re 89 MOTION to Reinstate their Cross-Motion for Limited Expedited

Discovery on Compliance with Preliminary Injunction (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit

A)(Keaney, Melissa) Modified on 5/4/2018 (SWT). (Entered: 05/03/2018)

05/ 9 (PLEASE DISREGARD. Refiled at Dkt. 94 and in C17-178, Dkt. #133)

03/ 1 DECLARATION of Casey Smith filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John

201 Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein,

8

Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen

Vaught re 89 MOTION to Reinstate their Cross-Motion for Limited Expedited

Discovery on Compliance with Preliminary Injunction (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A,

# 2 Exhibit B)(Keaney, Melissa) Modified on 5/4/2018 (SWT). (Entered:

05/03/2018)

05/ 9 (PLEASE DISREGARD. Refiled at Dkt. 131 in C17-178)) MOTION to Reinstate

03/ 2 their Cross-Motion for Limited Expedited Discovery on Compliance with

201 Preliminary Injunction, filed by Consol Plaintiffs Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jane

8

Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family

Services of Silicon Valley, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, John Doe 7, Allen

Vaught. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) Noting Date 5/11/2018, (Keaney,

Melissa) Modified on 5/4/2018 (SWT). (Entered: 05/03/2018)

05/ 9 DECLARATION of John Doe 1 filed by Consol Plaintiffs Afkab Mohamed

03/ 3 Hussein, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, Jewish Family Service of Seattle,

201 Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3,

8

John Doe 7, Allen Vaught re (92 in 2:17-cv-01707-JLR, 131 in 2:17-cv-00178-JLR)

MOTION to Reinstate their Cross-Motion for Limited Expedited Discovery on

Compliance with Preliminary Injunction (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Keaney,

Melissa) (Entered: 05/03/2018)

05/ 9 DECLARATION of Casey Smith filed by Consol Plaintiffs Afkab Mohamed

03/ 4 Hussein, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, Jewish Family Service of Seattle,

201 Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3,

8

John Doe 7, Allen Vaught re (92 in 2:17-cv-01707-JLR, 131 in 2:17-cv-00178-JLR)

MOTION to Reinstate their Cross-Motion for Limited Expedited Discovery on

Compliance with Preliminary Injunction (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit

B)(Keaney, Melissa) (Entered: 05/03/2018)

05/

***Motion terminated per filer's request: Plaintiff's 89 MOTION to Reinstate their

03/

Cross-Motion for Limited Expedited Discovery on Compliance with Preliminary

201 Injunction. (Duplicate of Dkt. #92 in C17-1707)

8

***Motion terminated per filer's request and refiled in C17-178 as Dkt. 131 where it

is currently pending: Plaintiff's 92 MOTION to Reinstate their Cross-Motion for

Limited Expedited Discovery on Compliance with Preliminary Injunction. (SWT)

(Entered: 05/04/2018)

05/ 9 Disregard this filing, per Chambers should have only been filed in consolidated case

04/ 5 17-cv-00178 Unopposed MOTION TO JOIN JFS PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO

201 REINSTATE THEIR CROSS-MOTION FOR LIMITED EXPEDITED

8

DISCOVERY ON COMPLIANCE WITH PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

MOTION , filed by Plaintiffs Jeffrey Doe, Joseph Doe. Noting Date 5/25/2018,

(Lin, Tana) Modified on 5/7/2018 (PS). (Entered: 05/04/2018)

05/ 9 Disregard this filing, per Chambers should have only been filed in consolidated case

04/ 6 17-cv-00178 DECLARATION of Lisa Nowlin filed by Plaintiffs Jeffrey Doe,

201 Joseph Doe re (95 in 2:17-cv-01707-JLR) Unopposed MOTION TO JOIN JFS

8

PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO REINSTATE THEIR CROSS-MOTION FOR

LIMITED EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ON COMPLIANCE WITH

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION MOTION (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit

B)(Lin, Tana) Modified on 5/7/2018 (PS). (Entered: 05/04/2018)

05/ 9 Disregard this filing, per Chambers should have only been filed in consolidated case

04/ 7 17-cv-00178 DECLARATION of Jay Gairson filed by Plaintiffs Jeffrey Doe,

201 Joseph Doe re (95 in 2:17-cv-01707-JLR) Unopposed MOTION TO JOIN JFS

8

PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO REINSTATE THEIR CROSS-MOTION FOR

LIMITED EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ON COMPLIANCE WITH

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION MOTION (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit

B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G,

# 8 Exhibit H)(Lin, Tana) Modified on 5/7/2018 (PS). (Entered: 05/04/2018)

05/ 9 Disregard this filing, per Chambers should have only been filed in consolidated case

04/ 8 17-cv-00178 DECLARATION of Hamdi Mohamed filed by Plaintiffs Jeffrey Doe,

201 Joseph Doe re (95 in 2:17-cv-01707-JLR) Unopposed MOTION TO JOIN JFS

8

PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO REINSTATE THEIR CROSS-MOTION FOR

LIMITED EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ON COMPLIANCE WITH

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION MOTION (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit

B)(Lin, Tana) Modified on 5/7/2018 (PS). (Entered: 05/04/2018)

05/ 9 Disregard this filing, per Chambers should have only been filed in consolidated case

04/ 9 17-cv-00178 PROPOSED ORDER (Unsigned) re (95 in 2:17-cv-01707-JLR)

201 Unopposed MOTION TO JOIN JFS PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO REINSTATE

8

THEIR CROSS-MOTION FOR LIMITED EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ON

COMPLIANCE WITH PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION MOTION (Lin,

Tana) Modified on 5/7/2018 (PS). (Entered: 05/04/2018)

05/

NOTICE of Docket Text Modification re 95 Unopposed MOTION TO JOIN JFS

07/

PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO REINSTATE THEIR CROSS-MOTION FOR

201 LIMITED EXPEDITED DISCOVERY ON COMPLIANCE WITH

8

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

MOTION, 96 Declaration, 97 Declaration, 98 Declaration, 99 Proposed Order

(Unsigned): Disregard these filings, per Chambers documents should have only

been filed in consolidated case 17-cv-00178. Documents have been correctly filed in 17-cv-00178 as dockets 136-140. (PS) (Entered: 05/07/2018)

11/ 1 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL: Attorney Karen C. Tumlin for

02/ 0 Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6,

201 0 John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish

8

Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught. (Tumlin, Karen) (Entered:

11/02/2018)

03/ 1 NOTICE of Change of Address/Change of Name of Attorney Linda Evarts. Filed by

20/ 0 Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6,

201 1 John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish

9

Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught. (Evarts, Linda) (Entered:

03/20/2019)

07/ 1 NOTICE of Change of Address/Change of Name of Attorney Melissa S. Keaney.

01/ 0 Filed by Plaintiffs John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5,

201 2 Jane Doe 6, John Doe 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of

9

Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught. (Keaney, Melissa)

Updated firm association/address/email on 7/2/2019 (DS). (Entered: 07/01/2019)

09/ 1 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL: Attorney Esther Sung for Plaintiffs

17/ 0 John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, John Doe

201 3 7, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family

9

Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught. (Sung, Esther) (Entered: 09/17/2019)

11/ 1 MINUTE ENTRY for proceedings held before Judge James L. Robart - Dep

13/ 0 Clerk: Ashleigh Drecktrah; Pla Counsel: Linda Evarts; Def Counsel: Joshua Kolsky;

201 4 CR: Andrea Ramirez; Telephone Conference held on 11/13/2019. The court hears

9

from counsel re: the parties' Notice Regarding Status of Settlement Discussions

(Dkt. # 200 in C17-0178JLR). For the reasons stated on the record, the discovery

dispute as stated in the parties' letter briefs (Dkt. ## 198, 199 in C17-0178JLR) is

STRICKEN and the court will enter its standard order of dismissal. (AD) (Entered:

11/13/2019)

11/ 1 ORDER OF DISMISSAL: Counsel having notified the Court of settlement of this

13/ 0 case, and it appearing that no issue remains for the Court's determination, IT IS

201 5 ORDERED that this action and all claims asserted herein are DISMISSED with

9

prejudice and without costs to any party. In the event that settlement is not

perfected, any party may move to reopen the case within 60 days of the date of this

order. Any trial date and pretrial dates previously set are hereby VACATED. Signed

by Judge James L. Robart. (AD) (Entered: 11/13/2019)

 
 Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 1 of 44

1

THE HONORABLE _______________

2

3

4

5

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

8
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF 9 SEATTLE; JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES
OF SILICON VALLEY; ALLEN 10 VAUGHT; AFKAB MOHAMED
HUSSEIN, JOHN DOE 1, JOHN DOE 2, 11 JOHN DOE 3, JANE DOE 4, JANE DOE
5, JANE DOE 6, and JOHN DOE 7, 12 individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated; 13
Plaintiffs, 14
v. 15
DONALD TRUMP, in his official capacity 16 as President of the United States; U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 17 SECURITY; ELAINE DUKE, in her
official capacity as Acting Secretary of 18 Homeland Security; U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF STATE; REX W. TILLERSON, in his 19 official capacity as Secretary of State;
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF 20 NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE; and
DANIEL COATS, in his official capacity 21 as Acting Director of National Intelligence,

Civil Action No. 17-1707
CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

22

Defendants.

23

24

25

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –1
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 2 of 44

1

INTRODUCTION

2

1. This lawsuit challenges the Trump Administration’s third attempt since taking

3 office at suspending the United States Refugee Admissions Program (the “USRAP”) and

4 blocking Muslim refugees from reaching the safety of this country.

5

2. For over half a century, the United States has played a leading role in helping

6 refugees from around the world rebuild their lives. In enacting the Refugee Act of 1980, which

7 created the USRAP as it exists today, Congress declared that “it is the historic policy of the

8 United States to respond to the urgent needs of persons subject to persecution in their

9 homelands,” including through resettlement to this country. Pub. L. No. 96-212 § 101(a), 94 Stat.

10 102, 102.

11

3. Despite this historical legacy and the currently unfolding global refugee crisis,

12 President Trump campaigned on rhetoric of fear and hate and a promise to ban Muslim refugees

13 from entering the United States. A week after taking office, on January 27, 2017, the President

14 attempted to deliver on that promise through an executive order (“EO-1”) that indefinitely

15 banned Syrian refugees, suspended the USRAP for 120 days with the exception of case-by-case

16 waivers, ordered a review of the USRAP during the 120-day period, and directed that religious

17 minorities be prioritized for admission once the USRAP resumes. President Trump expressly

18 confirmed that this provision in EO-1 was intended to preference Christian refugees.

19

4. When EO-1 was quickly enjoined, the President withdrew it and issued another

20 executive order on March 6, 2017 (“EO-2”), which also suspended the USRAP for 120 days with

21 the exception of case-by-case waivers, ordered a review of the USRAP during the 120-day

22 period, and directed that after that period the USRAP may resume only for certain nationalities.

23 This order was enjoined before it went into effect, although the Supreme Court allowed it to

24 partially take effect pending appeal in June.

25

5. On October 24, 2017, the day EO-2’s 120-day period expired, the President

26 imposed his third—and most blatantly discriminatory—attempt to ban Muslim refugees. That

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –2
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 3 of 44

1 same day, the President issued the Executive Order on Resuming the United States Refugee

2 Admissions Program with Enhanced Vetting Capabilities, and released an accompanying

3 Memorandum (together, “Refugee Ban 3.0”). Refugee Ban 3.0 continues the suspension of the

4 USRAP in two ways while the Administration purports to continue reviewing the USRAP: (1) it

5 suspends all entry of refugees from 11 countries, 9 of which are majority Muslim, for a minimum

6 of 90 days; and (2) it indefinitely suspends the process known as “follow-to-join,” which allows

7 refugees who have already been admitted to the country to reunite with their spouses and

8 children who remain abroad.

9

6. Refugee Ban 3.0 implements defendant Donald Trump’s and his Administration’s

10 often repeated goal of banning Muslim refugees from the country. Of all Muslim refugees

11 resettled in the United States in the last two fiscal years, 80% were from the nine Muslim-

12 majority countries whose nationals are subject to this most recent suspension. For the six

13 nationalities with the highest number of follow-to-join petitions in recent years, 62% of the

14 refugees who arrived from those nationalities in the USRAP generally identified as Muslim. The

15 Administration has not provided any reason justifying this suspension, or any specific criticisms

16 of the current, extensive USRAP process, even after having spent months reviewing the USRAP

17 under the mandates of the prior executive orders.

18

7. Refugee Ban 3.0 will irreparably harm the lives of the plaintiffs, their families,

19 and their loved ones—people like John Doe 1, an Iraqi former interpreter for the U.S. Army who

20 had been told to be ready to travel to the United States when Refugee Ban 3.0 came down and

21 remains stranded outside the country; Allen Vaught, his former Army supervisor, who has been

22 waiting to welcome him to the United States; and Jane Doe 4, a transgender Egyptian student

23 whom the U.S. Embassy had expedited for travel because of grave risks to her safety in her

24 current location.

25

8. These individual plaintiffs and others, along with Jewish resettlement agencies in

26 Seattle and Silicon Valley, request that the Court enter a nationwide injunction against Refugee

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –3
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 4 of 44

1 Ban 3.0 to strike down yet another discriminatory attempt at banning Muslim refugees, and to

2 restore the important, historic American tradition of protecting and aiding people fleeing

3 persecution.

4

PARTIES

5

9. The Plaintiffs in this case are individuals and organizations. The individual

6 plaintiffs are either United States residents who are unable to reunite with their family members

7 or close friends because of Refugee Ban 3.0, or refugees in the USRAP who are in limbo as a

8 result of Refugee Ban 3.0.

9

10. Plaintiff Jewish Family Service of Seattle (“JFS-S”) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit

10 corporation with its principal place of business in Washington State.

11

11. Plaintiff Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley (“JFS-SV”) is a 501(c)(3) non-

12 profit corporation with its principal place of business in California.

13

12. Plaintiff Afkab Mohamed Hussein was admitted to the United States as a refugee

14 from Somalia in 2015. He now lives in Columbus, Ohio. He has an approved follow-to-join

15 petition for his wife and his nearly two-year-old son.

16

13. Plaintiff John Doe 1 is an Iraqi national in the USRAP. He currently lives in

17 Cairo, Egypt. He served as an interpreter for the U.S. military in Iraq.

18

14. Plaintiff Allen Vaught is Doe 1’s former Army supervisor and has agreed to

19 house and to assist in Doe 1’s resettlement once he arrives to the United States. He currently

20 lives in Dallas, Texas.

21

15. Plaintiff John Doe 2 is an Iraqi national in the USRAP. He currently lives in Iraq.

22

16. Plaintiff John Doe 3 is Doe 2’s son-in-law and a lawful permanent resident. He

23 currently lives in Pennsylvania with Doe 2’s daughter.

24

17. Plaintiff Jane Doe 4 is an Egyptian national in the USRAP. She currently lives in

25 Egypt.

26

18. Plaintiff Jane Doe 5 is an Iraqi national in the USRAP. She currently lives in Iraq.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –4
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 5 of 44

1

19. Plaintiff Jane Doe 6 is Doe 5’s sister and a United States citizen. She currently

2 lives in Houston, Texas.

3

20. Plaintiff John Doe 7 is a lawful permanent resident who was admitted to the

4 United States as a refugee from Iraq in 2014. He currently lives in King County, Washington. He

5 has an approved follow-to-join petition for his nineteen-year-old son, whom he has not seen in

6 almost six years.

7

21. Defendant Donald Trump is the President of the United States. Defendant Trump

8 issued the Executive Order that serves as the basis for Refugee Ban 3.0. He is sued in his official

9 capacity.

10

22. Defendant U.S. Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) is a cabinet-level

11 department of the United States federal government. DHS jointly issued the Memorandum that

12 serves as the basis for Refugee Ban 3.0. The Memorandum assigns DHS a variety of

13 responsibilities for implementing and enforcing Refugee Ban 3.0.

14

23. Defendant Elaine Duke is the Acting Secretary of Homeland Security. Acting

15 Secretary Duke has responsibility for overseeing enforcement and implementation of Refugee

16 Ban 3.0 by all DHS staff. She is sued in her official capacity.

17

24. Defendant U.S. Department of State (“DOS”) is a cabinet-level department of the

18 United States federal government. DOS jointly issued the Memorandum that serves as the basis

19 for Refugee Ban 3.0. The Memorandum assigns DOS a variety of responsibilities for

20 implementing and enforcing Refugee Ban 3.0.

21

25. Defendant Rex Tillerson is the Secretary of State and has responsibility for

22 overseeing enforcement and implementation of Refugee Ban 3.0 by all DOS staff. He is sued in

23 his official capacity.

24

26. Defendant Office of the Director of National Intelligence (“ODNI”) is an

25 independent agency of the United States federal government. ODNI jointly issued the

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –5
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 6 of 44

1 Memorandum that serves as the basis for Refugee Ban 3.0. The Memorandum assigns ODNI a

2 variety of responsibilities for implementing and enforcing Refugee Ban 3.0.

3

27. Defendant Dan Coats is the Director of National Intelligence, and has

4 responsibility for overseeing enforcement and implementation of Refugee Ban 3.0 by all ODNI

5 staff. He is sued in his official capacity.

6

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

7

28. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 over Plaintiffs’

8 claims under the U.S. Constitution and federal statutes, as well as under 5 U.S.C. § 706. The

9 Court has additional remedial authority under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2202.

10

29. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391(e). Defendants are officers or employees

11 of the United States acting in their official capacities, and agencies of the United States. Plaintiff

12 JFS-S is a Washington corporation with its principal place of business in Seattle, Washington.

13 Plaintiff John Doe 7 is a U.S. lawful permanent resident who lives in King County, Washington.

14 No real property is involved in this action.

15

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

16

The United States Admitted a Record Number of Muslim Refugees in Response to the

Current Global Refugee Crisis, Triggering Virulent Islamophobia in Some Quarters 17

30. The world is currently experiencing the largest refugee crisis since World War II.

18

Globally, there are nearly 22.5 million refugees who have been displaced from their homes and

19

are seeking safety in another country. Of those refugees, fewer than 1 percent are resettled to

20

safety. Those refugees who are referred for resettlement tend to be only the most vulnerable.

21

31. Due to the ongoing civil war in Syria, which the office of the United Nations High

22

Commissioner for Refugees calls “one of the deadliest, most destructive conflicts in recent

23

history,” the largest percentage of refugees in the world currently are Syrian. Over 5 million

24

people have fled Syria, a country that is 87 percent Muslim, since the war began in 2011. In the

25

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –6
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 7 of 44

1 first half of 2017 alone, 1.3 million Syrians were newly displaced—an average of 7,000 people

2 per day who have been forced to flee their homes.

3

32. In response to this global refugee crisis, the United States began to accept more

4 refugees, and in particular significantly more Syrian refugees, starting in 2015. In that year,

5 President Obama directed his administration to accept at least 10,000 Syrian refugees. The

6 Obama Administration also raised the ceiling on annual refugee admissions from 70,000 to

7 85,000 in fiscal year 2016, and then to 110,000 in fiscal year 2017 in response to the scale of the

8 current global refugee crisis. Approximately 98% of the Syrian refugees resettled in the United

9 States were Muslim as of January 2017.

10

33. In part because of the United States’ humanitarian response to the Syrian refugee

11 crisis, the number of Muslim refugees arriving to the United States has increased. In fiscal year

12 2016, the United States admitted the highest number of Muslim refugees of any year since data

13 on religious affiliations of refugees became available. Nearly half of the total number of refugees

14 who entered the country in fiscal year 2016 were Muslim; and for the first time in a decade,

15 Muslim refugees outnumbered Christian refugees.

16

34. This increase in Muslim refugees fanned Islamophobia among some politicians, a

17 number of whom would end up in the Trump Administration. Now Vice President Mike Pence,

18 then-Governor of Indiana, was just one of numerous governors who attempted to refuse or

19 otherwise suspend the resettlement of Syrian refugees in their states, based on fearmongering

20 that Syrian refugees represented a “Trojan horse” through which radical Islam could enter the

21 United States.

22

35. These state attempts to ban Syrian refugees were uniformly blocked by the federal

23 courts. See, e.g., Tex. Health & Human Servs. Comm. v. United States, 193 F. Supp. 3d 733, 745

24 (N.D. Tex. 2016); Exodus Refugee Immigration, Inc. v. Pence, 838 F.3d 902, 903-04 (7th Cir.

25 2016). The Seventh Circuit found then-Governor Pence’s actions to be discriminatory and based

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –7
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 8 of 44

1 on nothing other than “nightmare speculation” of refugees posing as ISIS terrorists. Exodus

2 Refugee Immigration, 838 F.3d at 903.

3

36. Now Attorney General Jeff Sessions, then-Senator, claimed in November 2015

4 that “it is an unpleasant but unavoidable fact that bringing in a large unassimilated flow of

5 migrants from the Muslim world creates the conditions possible for radicalization and extremism

6 to take hold.” In September 2016, Sessions blamed the refugee community for “honor

7 killings”— “a well-worn tactic for stigmatizing and demeaning Islam and painting the religion,

8 and its men, as violent and barbaric.” Int’l Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 857 F.3d 554,

9 596 n.17 (4th Cir. 2017), cert. granted, 137 S. Ct. 2080 (2017), and vacated as moot, No. 16-

10 1436, 2017 WL 4518553 (U.S. Oct. 10, 2017). When the State Department official in charge of

11 the refugee program at the time responded that there was no evidence that there were any honor

12 killings among the refugee population resettled in the United States, Sessions retorted: “[I]t’s

13 from the same cultural background.”

14 Responding to the Wave of Islamophobia, President Trump Campaigned on a Promise to Ban Muslim Refugees
15
37. Presidential candidate Donald Trump was one of the politicians who traded on 16
this wave of Islamophobia, constantly conflating refugees—particularly Muslim refugees—with 17
“radical Islamic terrorists” and vilifying the Muslim faith. He repeatedly asserted that refugees, 18
particularly Syrian refugees, were a collective “Trojan horse” through which the Islamic State of 19
Iraq and Syria (“ISIS”) would attack the United States. He campaigned on the promise to 20
exclude Muslim refugees, as well as Muslim migrants generally, from entering the United States. 21
38. This rhetoric dates back at least to September 2015, when President Obama, 22
pursuant to his authority under the Refugee Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1157(a), announced that the United 23
States would resettle 10,000 Syrian refugees in the following fiscal year. Then-candidate Trump 24
derided this decision, claiming that “[t]hey could be ISIS,” or even “a terrorist army in hiding.” 25
If elected, Trump promised, “they’re going back.” 26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –8
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 9 of 44

1

39. Several weeks later, on November 13, 2015, ISIS claimed responsibility for

2 coordinated attacks in Paris, France, which killed 130 people. The attackers whose identities

3 have been confirmed were all Belgian and French nationals. While no Syrian nationals were

4 confirmed to have taken part in the attacks, a fake Syrian passport was found near one of the

5 attackers, whose fingerprints matched those of an individual who had entered Greece from

6 Turkey and presented himself as an asylum seeker. Notwithstanding the dramatic differences in

7 refugee screening and admissions to Europe and the United States, candidate Trump’s assertion

8 after the Paris attacks that refugees could be Muslim terrorists in disguise—and therefore must

9 be kept out—became a staple of his campaign.

10

40. In the days after the Paris attacks, candidate Trump tweeted about how Syrian

11 refugees, some of whom “could be ISIS,” were “now pouring into our great country,” claiming

12 further that some “were just caught on the southern border” with Mexico, trying to enter the

13 United States.

14

41. Candidate Trump subsequently suggested in the same month that he would, as

15 President, require all Muslims in the United States to register with the federal government as a

16 way to monitor would-be terrorists. Upon receiving political and media pushback, President

17 Trump sought to “clarify” that his proposal was rather to build a database, not for all Muslims,

18 but just for Syrian refugees—notwithstanding that DHS already has a database of all refugees.

19

42. As the election season progressed, candidate Trump broadened the scope of his

20 attack on Muslim immigrants. On December 7, 2015, candidate Trump issued a statement on his

21 campaign website entitled, “DONALD J. TRUMP STATEMENT ON PREVENTING MUSLIM

22 IMMIGRATION.” The statement declared that “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and

23 complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can

24 figure out what is going on.” The statement falsely suggested that all Muslims believe in “murder

25 against non-believers who won’t convert” and “unthinkable acts” against women. It remained on

26 President Trump’s campaign website until May 8, 2017—months after the inauguration.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –9
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 10 of 44

1

43. Defending his proposed “Muslim ban” on December 7, 2015, candidate Trump

2 explained on Good Morning America, “What I’m doing is I’m calling very simply for a

3 shutdown of Muslims entering the United States—and here’s a key—until our country’s

4 representatives can figure out what is going on.”

5

44. On March 9, 2016, candidate Trump stated, “I think Islam hates us. There’s . . . a

6 tremendous hatred there . . . . There’s an unbelievable hatred of us . . . . We can’t allow people

7 coming into this country who have this hatred of the United States . . . and of people that are not

8 Muslim . . . .”

9

45. The next day, during a debate, candidate Trump said he would “stick with

10 exactly” what he had said the night before. When asked if he was referring to all 1.6 billion

11 Muslims worldwide, he explained, “I mean a lot of them.”

12

46. On March 22, 2016, candidate Trump told Fox Business that “we’re having

13 problems with the Muslims, and we’re having problems with Muslims coming into the country.”

14

47. The same day, candidate Trump took to Twitter to criticize the Democratic

15 candidate for President, Hillary Clinton, for wanting to “let the Muslims flow in.”

16

48. A few days later, candidate Trump tweeted: “Europe and the U.S. must

17 immediately stop taking in people from Syria. This will be the destruction of civilization as we

18 know it! So sad!”

19

49. On May 11, 2016, candidate Trump announced that he was putting together an

20 “immigration commission,” potentially to be headed by Rudy Giuliani, that would “look at the

21 ‘Muslim ban,’ or ‘temporary ban’ as we call it.” As Mr. Giuliani explained later, the commission

22 was formed to devise a way to “legally” implement a “Muslim ban,” and it recommended using

23 territory as a proxy for religion.

24

50. Presumably heeding his commission’s advice, candidate Trump began to discuss

25 the ban as operating on the basis of geography. When pressed to name the countries that would

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –10
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 11 of 44

1 be affected, candidate Trump demurred, but stated that his ban would incorporate a pre-existing

2 list of what he called “terror nations.”

3

51. Lest there be any doubt about what he was proposing, however, candidate Trump

4 repeatedly rejected the notion that he was backing away from the promised Muslim ban—which

5 he continued to defend as a good idea—and instead emphasized that he was using territory as a

6 proxy for religion. Candidate Trump also continued to denigrate the Muslim faith and conflate

7 refugees, particularly Muslim refugees, with “Radical Islamic Terrorism.”

8

52. On June 13, 2016, for example, candidate Trump stated in a major speech on

9 national security that “many . . . are saying that I was right” to call for a Muslim Ban in

10 December 2015. In the same prepared speech, he promised to “suspend immigration from

11 [certain] areas of the world.”

12

53. Later that same day, candidate Trump tweeted: “In my speech on protecting

13 America I spoke about a temporary ban, which includes suspending immigration from nations

14 tied to Islamic terror.”

15

54. On June 25, 2016, candidate Trump stated that he “do[esn’t] want people coming

16 in from certain countries.” When asked which countries, candidate Trump explained to one

17 media outlet that “they’re pretty well decided. All you have to do is look!” and to another, “I

18 want people that have bad thoughts out. I would limit specific terrorist countries and we know

19 who those countries are.”

20

55. In a joint interview with candidate Trump and his running mate Pence that aired

21 on 60 Minutes on July 17, 2016, Pence confirmed that he agreed with Trump’s call for “a

22 temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States,” referring to his own attempt to suspend

23 the Syrian refugee program in Indiana. When Pence was asked about whether such calls are

24 offensive and unconstitutional, candidate Trump jumped in to explain that he will be using

25 territories as a proxy for religion, stating: “So you call it territories. OK? We’re gonna do

26 territories. We’re gonna not let people come in from Syria that nobody knows who they are.”

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –11
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 12 of 44

1 Asked again whether Muslims would be banned, candidate Trump said, “there’s nothing like”

2 the Constitution “[b]ut it doesn’t necessarily give us the right to commit suicide, as a country,

3 OK?” He again reiterated: “Call it whatever you want.”

4

56. In a July 24, 2016 interview on Meet the Press, candidate Trump was asked if his

5 plan to ban territories was a “rollback” from “[t]he Muslim Ban.” Candidate Trump responded:

6 “I don’t think so. I actually don’t think it’s a rollback. In fact, you could say it’s an expansion.

7 I’m looking now at territories.” Candidate Trump continued: “People were so upset when I used

8 the word Muslim. Oh, you can’t use the word Muslim. Remember this. And I’m okay with that,

9 because I’m talking territory instead of Muslim.”

10

57. When speaking to Sean Hannity of Fox News the next day, candidate Trump

11 again rejected the idea that he was retreating from his proposed Muslim ban, stating that his

12 “position’s gotten bigger now” because he is “talking about territories now.” Candidate Trump

13 explained that “we’re talking about territories” because “[p]eople don’t want me to say Muslim.”

14

58. In a major prepared speech on immigration on August 15, 2016, candidate Trump

15 outlined a plan to ask the Departments of State and Homeland Security to identify “a list of

16 regions where adequate screening cannot take place” so that the United States could “stop

17 processing visas from those areas until such time as it is deemed safe to resume based on new

18 circumstances or new procedures.” Although he then claimed that “[t]he size of current

19 immigration flows are too large to perform adequate screening,” the only “immigration flow” he

20 expressed concern about was that from the Middle East: “We admit about 100,000 permanent

21 immigrants from the Middle East every year. Beyond that, we admit hundreds of thousands of

22 temporary workers and visitors from the same regions. Hundreds of thousands. If we don’t

23 control the numbers, we can’t perform adequate screening.” He called for developing a new

24 “screening test” that he called “extreme, extreme vetting,” and proposed that the United States

25 “screen out” those who “who believe Sharia law should supplant American law.”

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –12
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 13 of 44

1

59. On August 31, 2016, candidate Trump, in another speech on immigration,

2 explained that his immigration policy would include asking applicants “their views about honor

3 killings, about respect for women and gays and minorities,” and their “[a]ttitudes on radical

4 Islam,” to ensure that those we admit “share our values.”

5

60. Throughout the summer and into the fall, candidate Trump issued press releases

6 that baselessly attacked refugees, as a categorical group, for allegedly supporting “Radical

7 Islamic Terrorism” and rejecting American values:

8

x “Hillary Clinton wants to dramatically increase admissions from the Middle East,

bringing in many hundreds of thousands during a first term—and we will have no

9

way to screen them, pay for them, or prevent the second generation from

radicalizing. We need to protect all Americans, of all backgrounds and all beliefs,

10

from Radical Islamic Terrorism—which has no place in an open and tolerant

society.” 11

x “Why does Hillary Clinton want to bring people here—in vast numbers—who

12

reject our values?”

13

x “Hillary Clinton also wants to push to bring in 620,000 refugees in her first

term—a number of whom come from countries where women and gays are

14

horribly brutalized—which will weaken our tolerant way of life.”

15

x “Terrorists are infiltrating our country. Now, Hillary Clinton wants a 550%

increase in Syrian refugees and countless more refugees from across the Middle

16

East. I want to keep you and your family safe.”

17

61. In responding to a question at a presidential debate in October 2016 about the

18 proposed Muslim ban, candidate Trump responded by referring to Muslim refugees, stating: “It’s

19 called extreme vetting. We are going to areas like Syria where they’re coming in by the tens of

20 thousands because of Barack Obama.”

21

62. On October 25, 2016, candidate Trump promised that he will take actions “on the

22 first day . . . to restore the rule of law,” such as “[s]uspend[ing] immigration from regions

23 compromised by Radical Islamic terrorism, including the suspension of the Syrian Refugee

24 Program.”

25

63. On October 27, candidate Trump warned that his opponent’s refugee plan to

26 allow Syrian refugees in the country “would leave us with generations of terrorism, radicalism

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –13
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 14 of 44

1 and extremism inside of our shores.” He claimed: “I only want to admit people who will support

2 this country and love its people.”

3

64. And on October 29, just weeks before the election, candidate Trump promised:

4 “We are going to . . . stop the massive inflow of refugees and keep Radical Islamic Terrorist out

5 of our country.”

6

65. On December 21, 2016, after his election, president-elect Trump was asked

7 whether he “had cause to rethink or reevaluate [his] plans to create a Muslim register or ban

8 Muslim immigration to the United States.” He replied: “You know my plans all along, and I’ve

9 been proven to be right, 100 percent correct.”

10

The Trump Administration Has Been Attempting Since Inauguration to Deliver on

President Trump’s Campaign Promise to Ban Muslim Refugees 11

66. After winning a campaign in which banning Muslim refugees was a key promise,

12

President Trump attempted to deliver on that promise just a week after being inaugurated

13

through an executive order issued on January 27, 2017 (“EO-1”). See Exec. Order No. 13769,

14

Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States, 82 Fed. Reg. 8977

15

(Jan. 27, 2017).

16

67. EO-1 was the Trump Administration’s first attempt to ban Muslim refugees from

17

the United States and favor Christian refugees. In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting

18

Network released the same day that he signed EO-1, President Trump confirmed that he intended

19

to change the refugee program to prioritize Christians. He explained: “If you were a Muslim you

20

could come in [to the United States], but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible . . . .

21

[T]hey were chopping off the heads of everybody but more so the Christians. And I thought it

22

was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them.”

23

68. EO-1 indefinitely blocked Syrian refugees from entering the United States. EO-1

24

§ 5(c).

25

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –14
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 15 of 44

1

69. EO-1 also suspended the USRAP for 120 days and directed the Secretary of State,

2 together with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the Director of

3 National Intelligence, to review the USRAP during this period “to determine what additional

4 procedures should be taken to ensure that those approved for refugee admission do not pose a

5 threat to the security and welfare of the United States” and “to implement such additional

6 procedures.” EO-1 § 5(a). During the 120-day period refugees could be admitted only on a

7 discretionary case-by-case basis and only if the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security

8 determined that “the admission of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest—

9 including when the person is a religious minority in his country of nationality facing religious

10 persecution.” EO-1 § 5(a) & (e). Upon the resumption of the USRAP, EO-1 further directed the

11 Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, to make changes “to

12 prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution,

13 provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of

14 nationality.” EO-1 § 5(b).

15

70. EO-1 also slashed by more than half the annual refugee admissions allotment that

16 was set prior to fiscal year 2017. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1157, the President has the power to

17 determine, at the beginning of each fiscal year, the ceiling on the number of refugees that may be

18 admitted in any fiscal year after appropriate consultation with members of Congress. For fiscal

19 year 2017, President Obama determined that admissions of up to 110,000 refugees was justified

20 by humanitarian concerns or was otherwise in the national interest. Three months after President

21 Obama set this ceiling, EO-1 attempted to lower it to 50,000 refugees. EO-1 § 5(d).

22

71. EO-1 further banned any entry for 90 days for individuals from seven countries,

23 each of which is more than 85 percent Muslim: Syria, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and

24 Yemen. EO-1 § 3(c). EO-1 and the implementation of this travel ban caused chaos throughout

25 the country’s airports and other ports of entry.

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –15
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 16 of 44

1

72. On February 3, 2017—less than a week after EO-1 was issued—this Court issued

2 a nationwide temporary restraining order enjoining the refugee ban in Sections 5(a)-(c) and 5(e)

3 and travel ban in section 3(c) of EO-1. Washington v. Trump, No. C17-0141JLR, 2017 WL

4 462040, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 3, 2017).

5

73. The Ninth Circuit, after hearing oral argument and construing the temporary

6 restraining order as a preliminary injunction, denied the government’s motion for a stay of that

7 injunction pending appeal. 857 F. 3d 1151, 1156 (9th Cir. 2017) (per curiam).

8

74. Shortly after the Ninth Circuit’s opinion issued, President Trump took to Twitter

9 to complain: “‘77% of refugees allowed into U.S. since travel reprieve hail from seven suspect

10 countries.’ (WT) [sic] SO DANGEROUS!”

11

75. Rather than pursuing the appeal from EO-1, on March 6, 2017, President Trump

12 signed a new Executive Order (“EO-2”), which became effective on March 16 and rescinded and

13 replaced EO-1. Exec. Order No. 13780, Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into

14 the United States, 82 Fed. Reg. 13209 (Mar. 6, 2017).

15

76. EO-2 was the Trump Administration’s second attempt to ban refugees, and it was

16 substantially similar to EO-1. In fact, before issuing EO-2, President Trump explained why he

17 planned to do so: “I got elected on defense of our country. And I keep my campaign promises.

18 And our citizens will be very happy when they see the result.” In the days that followed the

19 issuance of EO-2, Press Secretary Sean Spicer affirmed that “the principles of the executive

20 order remain the same.” Stephen Miller, a senior advisor to President Trump, explained that

21 EO-2 would constitute “the same basic policy outcome for the country.”

22

77. Like EO-1, EO-2 suspended the USRAP for 120 days and directed the Secretary

23 of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the

24 Director of National Intelligence, to review the USRAP during this period “to determine what

25 additional procedures should be used to ensure that individuals seeking admission as refugees do

26 not pose a threat to the security and welfare of the United States” and “to implement such

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –16
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 17 of 44

1 additional procedures.” EO-2 § 6(a). During the 120-day period, refugees could be admitted only

2 on a discretionary case-by-case basis and only if the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security

3 determined that “the entry of such individuals as refugees is in the national interest and does not

4 pose a threat to the security or welfare of the United States.” EO-2 § 6(c). EO-2 directed that the

5 USRAP shall resume after 120 days “only for stateless persons and nationals of countries for

6 which the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National

7 Intelligence have jointly determined that additional procedures implemented . . . are adequate to

8 ensure the security and welfare of the United States.” EO-2 § 6(a).

9

78. Like EO-1, EO-2 attempted to lower the ceiling on admissions of refugees for

10 fiscal year 2017 to 50,000. EO-2 § 6(b).

11

79. Like EO-1, EO-2 also banned entry into the United States for a new 90-day period

12 for individuals from six of the same seven predominantly Muslim countries identified in EO-1:

13 Syria, Sudan, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. EO-2 § 2(c).

14

80. On March 15, 2017, before EO-2 could take effect, the District of Hawai’i issued

15 a nationwide temporary restraining order of the refugee ban in section 6 and travel ban in

16 section 2 of EO-2, holding that these sections likely violated the Establishment Clause. Hawai’i

17 v. Trump, 241 F. Supp. 3d 1119, 1140 (D. Haw. 2017). On March 29, 2017, the District Court

18 converted the Temporary Restraining Order into a preliminary injunction. Hawai’i v. Trump, 245

19 F. Supp. 3d 1227, 1239 (D. Haw. 2017).

20

81. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the Hawai’i district court’s preliminary

21 injunction as to the refugee and travel bans, holding that those bans violate the Immigration and

22 Nationality Act (“INA”), and that the President exceeded his statutory authority in suspending

23 refugee admissions. Hawai’i v. Trump, 859 F.3d 741, 755-56 (9th Cir. 2017) (per curiam).

24

82. In a parallel proceeding, on March 16, 2017, the District of Maryland issued a

25 nationwide preliminary injunction of the travel ban, finding that it likely violated the

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –17
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 18 of 44

1 Establishment Clause. Int’l Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 241 F. Supp. 3d 539, 566 (D.

2 Md. 2017).

3

83. Sitting en banc, the Fourth Circuit affirmed on the same basis. Int’l Refugee

4 Assistance Project v. Trump, 857 F.3d 554, 605-06 (4th Cir. 2017) (en banc).

5

84. The government petitioned for certiorari in the Maryland and Hawai’i cases and

6 moved for a stay of the preliminary injunctions. On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court granted

7 certiorari, consolidated the cases, and partially stayed both preliminary injunctions pending

8 appeal to the extent they applied to “foreign nationals abroad who have no connection to the

9 United States at all.” Trump v. Int’l Refugee Assistance Project, 137 S. Ct. 2080, 2087-88 (2017)

10 (per curiam).

11

85. President Trump expressed fury that multiple courts had enjoined EO-2, which he

12 called the “watered down” version of EO-1 that he had agreed to only at the urging of his

13 lawyers.

14

86. Shortly after the ruling from the District of Hawai’i preliminarily enjoining

15 portions of EO-2, President Trump stated: “The best way to keep foreign terrorists or, as some

16 people would say in certain instances, radical Islamic terrorists from attacking our country is to

17 stop them from entering our country in the first place.” He claimed that he had agreed to “tailor”

18 EO-2 to resist legal challenge at the urging of “the lawyers,” but asserted that “we ought to go

19 back to the first one and go all the way, which is what I wanted to do in the first place.”

20

87. On June 5, in a series of tweets, he said, “People, the lawyers and the courts can

21 call it whatever they want, but I am calling it what we need and what it is, a TRAVEL BAN! /

22 The Justice Dept. should have stayed with the original Travel Ban, not the watered down,

23 politically correct version they submitted to S.C. / The Justice Dept. should ask for an expedited

24 hearing of the watered down Travel Ban before the Supreme Court - & seek [a] much tougher

25 version!”

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –18
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 19 of 44

1

88. On August 18, President Trump declared on Twitter that “Radical Islamic

2 Terrorism must be stopped by whatever means necessary! The courts must give us back our

3 protective rights. Have to be tough!”

4

89. Despite President Trump’s displeasure with the court rulings enjoining EO-2, the

5 Trump Administration had succeeded by the fall of 2017 to admit fewer Muslim refugees. The

6 religious composition of refugees arriving to the United States has shifted on a monthly basis

7 since the inauguration. In February, the first full month of the Administration, 50% of the

8 refugees who entered the United States were Muslim and 41% were Christians. By June,

9 Christians (57%) made up a larger share of arrivals than Muslims (31%).

10

90. On September 24, 2017, with Supreme Court review pending and EO-2’s 90-day

11 travel ban expiring, President Trump replaced EO-2 with a presidential proclamation (“EO-3”).

12 Proclamation No. 9645, Enhancing Vetting Capabilities and Processes for Detecting Attempted

13 Entry Into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public Safety Threats, 82 Fed. Reg. 45161

14 (Sept. 24, 2017) (“EO-3”). EO-3 indefinitely banned entry to the United States of most nationals

15 of six Muslim-majority countries—Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. Although two

16 non-Muslim majority countries—Venezuela and North Korea—were listed in EO-3, the impact

17 on the nationals of those countries was limited. EO-3 banned only certain Venezuelan

18 government officials and their immediate relatives who seek to enter the United States on non-

19 immigrant visitor and business visas, affecting at most a few hundred Venezuelans a year.

20 Similarly, although EO-3 barred all immigrant and non-immigrant entry from North Korea, in

21 recent years there have been only a hundred or so admissions of North Koreans each year.

22

91. On October 17, 2017, before EO-3 could go into effect fully, the District of

23 Hawai’i preliminarily enjoined EO-3, holding that the President again exceeded its statutory

24 authority in banning hundreds of millions of people from the country. Hawai’i v. Trump, No. 17-

25 00050 DKW-KSC, 2017 WL 4639560, at *11-12 (D. Haw. Oct. 17, 2017).

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –19
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 20 of 44

1

92. The District of Maryland also issued a preliminary injunction later that day,

2 holding in part that EO-3 likely violates the Establishment Clause for similar reasons as EO-2.

3 Int’l Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 2012 WL 4674314, at *40-41 (D. Md. Oct. 17, 2017).

4

93. EO-3 did not affect refugees, as the refugee ban in EO-2 was still in effect at the

5 time EO-3 was issued.

6

Refugee Ban 3.0 Is Yet Another Attempt by the Trump Administration to Ban Muslim

Refugees 7

94. On October 24, 2017, the day that EO-2’s refugee ban expired, President Trump

8

issued a new executive order (“EO-4”). Exec. Order No. 13815, Resuming the United States

9

Refugee Admissions Program With Enhanced Vetting Capabilities, 82 Fed. Reg. 50055 (Oct. 24,

10

2017).

11

95. EO-4 declared that “Presidential action to suspend the entry of refugees under the

12

USRAP is not needed at this time to protect the security and interests of the United States and its

13

people.” EO-4 § 3(a).

14

96. EO-4 also reported that, pursuant to EO-2’s directive to review the USRAP,

15

improvements were made to screening and vetting of refugees, and that “[t]he Secretary of State,

16

the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the Director of National Intelligence have advised that

17

the improvements to the USRAP vetting process are generally adequate to ensure the security

18

and welfare of the United States.” EO-4 § 2(a).

19

97. Nevertheless, EO-4 required, with respect to “[c]ertain [c]ategories of [r]efugees,”

20

that the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security “coordinate to assess any

21

risks to the security and welfare of the United States that may be presented by the entry into the

22

United States through the USRAP of stateless persons and foreign nationals.” EO-4 § 3(a)(i).

23

98. EO-4 provided further that the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation

24

with the Secretary of State, “shall determine . . . whether any actions should be taken to address

25

the risks to the security and welfare of the United States presented by permitting any category of

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –20
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 21 of 44

1 refugees to enter this country, and, if so, what those actions should be,” and that the two officials

2 “shall administer the USRAP consistent with those determinations.” Id.

3

99. EO-4 reported that the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security,

4 and the Director of National Intelligence “have advised that . . . they will apply special measures

5 to certain categories of refugees whose entry continues to pose potential threats to the security

6 and welfare of the United States.” EO-4 § 2(a). EO-4 did not, however, state what those “special

7 measures” were, or the “categories” to which they would apply.

8

100. On the same day that EO-4 was issued, a memorandum to the President from the

9 Secretaries of State and Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence, dated

10 October 23, 2017, with an accompanying Addendum (the “Memorandum”), was released. The

11 Memorandum continues the refugee bans in EO-1 and EO-2 in two ways: (1) it continues to

12 suspend the USRAP for refugees from 11 countries, 9 of which are overwhelmingly Muslim; and

13 (2) it indefinitely suspends the follow-to-join process, through which refugees already in the

14 United States can be reunited here with their spouses and minor children who remain abroad.

15

The Ban on Refugees from Nine Overwhelmingly Muslim Countries

16

101. The Memorandum imposes a suspension on refugee admissions for “nationals of,

17 and stateless persons who last habitually resided in, 11 particular countries previously identified

18 as posing a higher risk to the United States through their designation on the Security Advisory

19 Opinion (SAO) list.”

20

102. A “Security Advisory Opinion,” or “SAO,” refers to a particular biographic

21 security check administered for refugee applicants, including for those who are members of a

22 group or nationality that the government has designated as requiring this additional check. An

23 SAO is in addition to the extensive security vetting that all refugee applicants receive prior to

24 being resettled to the United States.

25

103. Neither EO-4 nor the Memorandum identify the “11 particular countries” that are

26 on the SAO list and therefore whose refugee nationals are now prohibited from entering, but

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –21
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 22 of 44

1 upon information, belief, and public reporting, those countries are Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Mali, 2 Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Yemen, South Sudan, and North Korea.1

3

104. Over 40% of all refugees resettled through the USRAP in the last two fiscal years

4 came from one of these 11 countries, with refugees from South Sudan and North Korea

5 accounting for a miniscule percentage. Of those 11 countries, all but South Sudan and North

6 Korea are at least 85 percent Muslim.

7

105. Over 80% of refugees resettled from these 11 countries over the last two fiscal

8 years have been Muslim.

9

106. These countries’ nationals comprise an overwhelming percentage of all Muslim

10 refugees resettled through the USRAP. Of all Muslim refugees resettled in the United States in

11 the last two fiscal years, 80% were from the 9 Muslim-majority countries whose nationals are

12 subject to the Memorandum’s suspension.

13

107. The Memorandum states that, “for countries subject to SAOs,” the government

14 will conduct “a review and analysis of each country” that is “to be completed within 90 days.”

15 The Memorandum, however, does not explain why such review and analysis is necessary.

16 Indeed, refugees from these countries already receive heightened vetting under current

17 procedures, but the Memorandum does not identify any deficiencies with those procedures.

18 Instead, it inexplicably relies on the existence of those procedures to attempt to justify the need

19 for review and analysis. Nor does the Memorandum explain why the review and analysis was not

20 completed during the 120-day period under EO-2 when the Secretary of State, in conjunction

21 with the Secretary of Homeland Security and in consultation with the Director of National

22 Intelligence, was directed to conduct a review of the USRAP.

23

24

25

1 See, e.g., Yeganeh Torbati & Mica Rosenberg, Under Trump Plan, Refugees from 11 Countries Face

Additional U.S. Barriers, Reuters (Oct. 24, 2017), http://reut.rs/2gRvoDh; Sabrina Siddiqui, Trump Ends Refugee

26 Ban With Order to Review Program For 11 Countries, The Guardian (Oct. 24, 2017), http://bit.ly/2llufW9; Ted

Hesson, Trump Targets 11 Nations in Refugee Order, Politico (Oct. 24, 2017), http://politi.co/2gJQ5NW.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –22
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 23 of 44

1

108. The Memorandum states further that during this new 90-day review period,

2 refugees who are nationals of (or stateless persons who last habitually resided in) one of these 11

3 countries will be “consider[ed] . . . for potential admission” to the United States only if their

4 resettlement here “would fulfill critical foreign policy interests, without compromising national

5 security and the welfare of the United States.” The Memorandum does not explain why such an

6 assessment is necessary specifically for refugees from the 11 SAO countries. Nor does the

7 Memorandum provide any criteria for that assessment, instead stating only that the Secretary of

8 Homeland Security may admit refugees who meet it “on a case-by-case basis only.” This “case-

9 by-case” exception to the Memorandum’s suspension is nearly identical to the case-by-case

10 waiver provisions that existed in President Trump’s prior executive orders banning entry of

11 refugees and nationals of specified Muslim-majority nations.

12

109. The Memorandum does not cite any authority for imposing this suspension on

13 admission of nationals from the 11 SAO countries, nor does it state whether admission of

14 refugees from the SAO countries will resume after 90 days. The Memorandum’s suspension

15 applies even to refugees who have already obtained an SAO, passed it and all other required

16 security checks, and had been preparing to travel to the United States.

17

110. The Memorandum further provides that, during the suspension period, “the

18 Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security will temporarily prioritize refugee

19 applications from other non-SAO countries” by “tak[ing] resources” that would have been used

20 to process the refugee applications of nationals from one of the 11 countries, and “reallocat[ing]

21 them to process applicants” from countries not subject to the suspension. The Memorandum does

22 not cite any authority for this reallocation of resources away from the SAO countries to the non-

23 SAO countries, nor does it state whether the resources will ever be shifted back to SAO

24 countries. The Memorandum also does not provide any rational justification for this reallocation

25 of resources—it states only that it is necessary because processing of applications from SAO

26 countries is “resource intensive.”

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –23
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 24 of 44

1

111. This prioritization of applications from non-SAO countries will have the effect of

2 significantly increasing the percentage of Christian refugees resettled here while significantly

3 decreasing the percentage of Muslim refugees. According to the Pew Research Center, a

4 nonpartisan fact tank, “[o]ne important factor that influences the religious composition of

5 refugee arrivals is country of origin.” In the past two fiscal years, approximately 70% of the

6 refugees resettled from the non-SAO countries were Christian; only 16% were Muslim.

7

112. The Memorandum thus implements the Trump Administration’s oft-repeated

8 desire to ban Muslim refugees while prioritizing the resettlement of Christian refugees, including

9 the President’s pledge to help Christians on the day of EO-1, as well as his claim in April that he

10 is “going to be helping the Christians big league.”

11

113. In fact, the day after EO-4 was issued and the Memorandum was released, Vice

12 President Mike Pence gave an address at the annual dinner of In Defense of Christians, a non-

13 profit organization that, per its website, advocates “for the protection and preservation of

14 Christians and Christianity in the Middle East.” During his address, Vice President Pence called

15 out “radical Islamic terrorists” who have perpetrated “vile acts of persecution animated by hatred

16 for Christians and the Gospel of Christ” and promised Christians in the Middle East that “[h]elp

17 is on the way.”

18

114. On October 26, 2017, in a hearing on Oversight of the United States Refugee

19 Admissions Program, Acting Assistant Secretary Simon Henshaw of the U.S. Department of

20 State testified that the USRAP will “continue to demonstrate America’s commitment to assisting

21 victims of ISIS in northern Iraq and throughout the Middle East,” choosing to highlight only the

22 USRAP’s work in Northern Iraq with “Yezidi, Christian, and members of other religious

23 minorities,” without any mention of the Muslim refugees in need of help in the region.

24

115. Even if EO-4’s suspension on admissions of nationals of SAO countries is limited

25 to 90 days, it will have a devastating impact on Muslim refugees. That is because refugees have a

26 set window to complete their travel—if they miss this window, the time-consuming security and

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –24
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 25 of 44

1 medical checks that they passed will begin to expire. Once a check expires, it must be re-

2 initiated. But because each security check can take months or even years to complete, the

3 expiration of even one can have a cascading effect, as other clearances expire while the first is

4 being re-processed. As a result, even relatively short-term delays in the resettlement process may

5 reverberate for far longer. This cycle may turn even a temporary delay into a lifetime ban.

6

Suspension of the Follow-to-Join Process

7

116. The Memorandum also indefinitely suspends the follow-to-join (“FTJ”) process

8 for refugees.

9

117. The FTJ process (also called the “Visas 93” process) is a family reunification

10 process that allows an individual admitted to the United States as a refugee to petition for his or

11 her spouse and unmarried minor children to come to the United States.

12

118. Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1157(c)(2)(A), a spouse or child of a refugee is entitled to

13 the same admission status as the refugee if certain criteria are met.

14

119. There are numerous steps an FTJ-eligible family member must undergo before

15 being able to travel to the United States.

16

120. First, the refugee in the United States must file an I-730 petition with U.S.

17 Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”). The petitioner must establish that he or she is

18 a refugee, and bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the FTJ

19 candidate is an eligible spouse or unmarried minor child. 8 C.F.R. § 207.7(e).

20

121. If the criteria are met, the USCIS adjudicating officer is required to approve the

21 petition. Id. § 207.7(f).

22

122. Beneficiaries are then interviewed either by a Department of State consular

23 officer or a USCIS officer at a U.S. embassy or consulate. Id.

24

123. Beneficiaries are conditionally approved to travel if the interviewing officer finds

25 that: (1) the beneficiary has established by a preponderance of the evidence his or her identity,

26 and a qualified relationship to the petitioner; (2) the beneficiary is not subject to any mandatory

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –25
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 26 of 44

1 bars or relevant inadmissibility ground; and (3) the beneficiary was not previously granted

2 asylum or refugee status by the United States.

3

124. The beneficiary must also provide ink-free digital fingerprint scans and undergo

4 the same medical examination required of immigrant visa applicants.

5

125. The Memorandum states that “additional security measures must be implemented

6 promptly” for FTJ refugees, and that such measures “must be implemented before admission of

7 following-to-join refugees can resume.”

8

126. The Memorandum claims that FTJ beneficiaries “do not undergo enhanced DHS

9 review,” but does not assert that the current FTJ screening process is inadequate.

10

127. The Memorandum does not cite to any authority for suspending the FTJ process.

11

128. Over the last few years, approximately 2,500 refugees were annually admitted

12 through the FTJ process to be reunited with spouses or parents already in the United States.

13

129. In recent years, the nationalities most represented in the FTJ process were Iraqi,

14 Somali, Burmese, Congolese, Ethiopian, and Eritrean. In fiscal year 2016 and 2017, 62% of the

15 refugees who arrived from these six countries through the USRAP generally identified as

16 Muslim.

17

Refugee Ban 3.0 Serves No Genuine National Security or Foreign Policy Purpose

18

130. Even after months of reviewing the USRAP as directed under EO-2, the Trump

19 Administration has not provided any reasoned justifications for the suspension of refugee

20 admissions under Refugee Ban 3.0.

21

131. Refugees already receive the most thorough vetting of any travelers to the United

22 States. The extensive screening process generally starts with the refugee registering with the

23 United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (“UNHCR”) in the country to which he or she

24 has fled. If the UNHCR determines after an interview and review of documents that the applicant

25 meets the United States’ criteria for resettlement consideration and presents no disqualifying

26 information, the UNHCR refers the case to a U.S. embassy.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –26
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 27 of 44

1

132. The embassy then transfers the case to one of nine Resettlement Support Centers

2 across the world for further processing. These Centers process refugee applications, prepare case

3 files, and initiate security checks. Once the case files are prepared, the applicant interviews with

4 the USCIS to establish eligibility for refugee status and resettlement in the United States.

5

133. If the refugee is eligible, the case proceeds through multiple layers of security and

6 medical screening, most of which apply separately to every member of the family in the refugee

7 application, including children.

8

134. At the final stages of refugee processing, refugees receive an “assurance” of

9 sponsorship from one of nine private non-profit organizations that are dedicated to welcoming

10 refugees into the country and have been designated as “resettlement agencies” by the

11 government. An assurance is a formal, documented commitment by the resettlement agency and

12 its affiliate to arrange for the reception of the refugee and provide individualized, specialized

13 assistance before and after his or her arrival in the United States.

14

135. The FTJ beneficiaries are also already subjected to their own thorough vetting and

15 security screening procedures.

16

136. The refugee vetting process is also already reviewed and enhanced on an ongoing

17 basis in response to particular threats without the need to suspend the USRAP in order to make

18 adjustments.

19

137. In addition, the government’s own research and analysis concludes that country-

20 based bans, whether of refugees or other immigrants, are ineffective. After EO-1 was enjoined

21 but before EO-2 was issued, President Trump ordered the DHS and the Department of Justice to

22 produce an intelligence report to demonstrate that foreign nationals from particular Muslim-

23 majority countries present a substantial security threat to the United States. In response, analysts

24 at DHS prepared a draft report, released to the press on February 24, 2017, indicating that there

25 was insufficient evidence that nationals of the seven Muslim-majority countries included in EO-1

26 pose a terror threat to the United States. The draft report also found that citizenship is an

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –27
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 28 of 44

1 “unlikely indicator” of terrorism threats to the United States, and that few people from those

2 countries identified in EO-1 have carried out attacks or been involved in terrorism-related

3 activities in the United States since Syria’s civil war started in 2011.

4

138. During the four decades from 1975 to the end of 2015, over three million refugees

5 have been admitted to the United States. Despite this number, according to policy analysis from

6 the Cato Institute, only three refugees have killed people in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil during

7 this period and none of these refugees were from the 11 listed countries in the Memorandum.

8 Although EO-2 claimed that “more than 300 persons who had entered the United States as

9 refugees were then the subjects of counterterrorism investigations by the Federal Bureau of

10 Investigation,” EO-2 § 1(h), EO-2 did not acknowledge that very few FBI initial assessments of

11 terrorism threats become intensive investigations: for example, in the four months from

12 December 2008 to March 2009, the FBI began 11,667 “assessments” related to terrorism, only

13 427 of which—less than 4%—led even to more intensive investigations.

14

Refugee Ban 3.0 Irreparably Harms Plaintiffs

15

Afkab Mohamed Hussein

16

139. Afkab Mohamed Hussein is a refugee from Somalia who was admitted to the

17 United States in 2015. Mr. Hussein now lives in Columbus, Ohio and works as a truck driver.

18 Mr. Hussein has approved follow-to-join petitions for his wife and his nearly two-year-old son.

19 He is Muslim. Mr. Hussein is and has been represented in his follow-to-join petition by

20 Community Refugee & Immigration Services (CRIS).

21

140. Mr. Hussein and his parents fled Somalia when Mr. Hussein was only three years

22 old because militias were targeting people of their clan, including Mr. Hussein’s family. Mr.

23 Hussein grew up in a refugee camp in Kenya and married his wife there. When Mr. Hussein was

24 admitted to the United States as a refugee, a year after his marriage, his wife was pregnant with

25 their son. Mr. Hussein has not seen his wife since then and he has never met his son, his only

26 child. His wife and son are both nationals of Somalia.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –28
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 29 of 44

1

141. Mr. Hussein’s follow-to-join petitions for his wife and son were approved in June

2 2016, his wife was interviewed, and his wife and son have undergone two medical examinations

3 because the results of their first examinations expired while they were waiting for approval to

4 travel.

5

142. Knowing that he will be indefinitely separated from his wife and his son because

6 of Refugee Ban 3.0 has been very difficult for Mr. Hussein. Mr. Hussein has never met his son,

7 his only child, because his son was born after he was admitted to the United States. Mr. Hussein

8 and his wife are very close and they speak on the phone every day. They want to have more

9 children together, but they do not know when they will be together again. Mr. Hussein feels sad

10 about their separation and helpless because he believes it is his responsibility to protect and care

11 for his family and he cannot do that from so far away.

12

143. Mr. Hussein feels that Refugee Ban 3.0’s purpose was to prevent Muslims like

13 him and his family from entering the United States. He feels that he is being personally targeted

14 based on his religious beliefs, and he feels anxiety and stress as a result.

15

John Doe 1

16

144. John Doe 1 (“Doe 1”) is an Iraqi national who currently lives in Cairo, Egypt.

17 Doe 1 is and has been represented in his refugee application by U.S.-based attorneys offering pro

18 bono services through IRAP in the ordinary course of IRAP’s work as a legal services provider.

19 Doe 1 fled Iraq in 2014 after his and his family’s lives were threatened because of his service and

20 loyalty to the United States Army. Doe 1 is waiting to travel to the United States as a refugee

21 through the Direct Access Program for U.S.-Affiliated Iraqis (“DAP”), which provides a path for

22 resettlement for people like him who served the United States government. He was conditionally

23 approved for resettlement to the United States on or around December 2016.

24

145. In early October 2017, the International Organization for Migration (“IOM”)

25 called Doe 1 to tell him to get ready to travel to the United States. While Doe 1 was attempting

26 to update his new passport on IOM’s advice, Refugee Ban 3.0 was issued.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –29
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 30 of 44

1

146. When Doe 1 learned that that Refugee Ban 3.0 would effectively suspend refugee

2 admissions for nationals from eleven countries, including Iraq, for at least 90 days, he felt scared

3 and helpless. He had been waiting to enter the United States for almost three years in difficult

4 and dangerous conditions, away from his family, without the ability to work. He is afraid any

5 more delay will put him and his family in serious danger. Numerous Iraqi interpreters who

6 served the United States have been murdered by Al Qaeda in Iraq or by ISIS, and he is afraid of

7 meeting the same fate.

8

147. Doe 1 and his family are Sunni Muslim. He believes that the purpose of the

9 Executive Order and Memorandum is to prevent Muslims like him from entering the United

10 States. The anti-Muslim statements and views behind suspending admission from eleven SAO

11 countries—nine of which are Muslim-majority countries—make him feel targeted for his

12 religious beliefs and have caused him anxiety and stress.

13

Allen Vaught

14

148. Allen Vaught is a lawyer, veteran of the U.S. Army, and a former member of the

15 Texas House of Representatives. He is a U.S. citizen and lives in Dallas, Texas. As a Captain in

16 the Army, Mr. Vaught was responsible for hiring Arabic translators. Mr. Vaught hired Doe 1

17 while stationed in Fallujah, Iraq.

18

149. After his honorable discharge from the military, Mr. Vaught has expended

19 significant time, effort, and expense to resettle Doe 1 in the United States. Mr. Vaught submitted

20 a letter of recommendation in support of Doe 1’s DAP application and volunteered to house him

21 and pay his expenses when he arrived in the United States. Mr. Vaught and his family held

22 fundraisers and raised approximately $800 to help Doe 1 get on his feet once he arrived. Upon

23 hearing that Doe 1 was soon to travel to the U.S., Mr. Vaught rearranged his home to make room

24 for Doe 1.

25

150. Mr. Vaught was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, resulting

26 from his service in the Army. Mr. Vaught’s PTSD is exacerbated by Doe 1’s inability to enter

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –30
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 31 of 44

1 the United States. Having hired Doe 1, Mr. Vaught feels responsible for the continued danger

2 that Doe 1 is in and has trouble sleeping at night wondering if Doe 1 will be killed before he gets

3 to the United States. Two other translators that Mr. Vaught worked with in Iraq have been

4 murdered.

5

151. Mr. Vaught believes that Refugee Ban 3.0 is intended to target Muslims and

6 believes that it is inconsistent with the values he fought to uphold as a commissioned officer in

7 the Army.

8

John Doe 2

9

152. John Doe 2 (“Doe 2”) is a refugee in DAP. He is a national of, and is currently

10 living in, Iraq. He is Muslim. Doe 2 is and has been represented in his refugee application by

11 IRAP in the ordinary course of IRAP’s work as a legal services provider. Doe 2 worked as an

12 interpreter for the United States Army, and later helped to promote democracy and the new Iraqi

13 constitution. Two of his colleagues were killed for their service promoting the Iraqi constitution,

14 and Doe 2 and his family received threats to their lives. In 2010, he came to the United States,

15 accompanied by his wife and five children, to complete his PhD. Upon graduation in 2014, he

16 travelled back to Mosul, his hometown, because two Iraqi colleagues had personally and

17 financially guaranteed his return at the end of his degree. His wife and children remained in the

18 United States and sought asylum.

19

153. Doe 2 has been unable to rejoin his family since ISIS seized control of Mosul

20 shortly after his return to Iraq. He applied as a refugee through DAP and was conditionally

21 approved for resettlement with his family in Pennsylvania in March 2016. He was awaiting

22 security checks and travel booking at the time of the first, second, and fourth Executive Orders.

23

154. Doe 2 has been apart from his family for over three years now, and the separation

24 is very painful. He is an integral member of the family, and his family worries constantly that his

25 life is in danger in Iraq. He is devastated to miss milestones in his children’s lives and has not

26 been able to meet his two granddaughters. He also feels betrayed because he enthusiastically

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –31
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 32 of 44

1 served the United States’ democratization efforts, endangering his life and his family’s lives in

2 the process, and is now unable to resettle with his family in the United States.

3

John Doe 3

4

155. John Doe 3 (“Doe 3”) is a lawful permanent resident residing in Pennsylvania and

5 is Doe 2’s son-in-law. Doe 3 has been separated from his father-in-law for over three years, and

6 is intensely worried about his father-in-law’s safety in Iraq. He knows that his father-in-law has

7 been targeted by extremists for his service to the United States Army, his support of the Iraqi

8 democratic constitution, and his affiliation with a United States university. He understands that

9 his father-in-law has completed several stages of his refugee application as part of DAP.

10

156. Doe 3’s wife is her father’s resettlement sponsor, and in April 2016 the

11 resettlement agency told Doe 3’s wife to expect her father’s arrival by August 2016. Since then,

12 Doe 3’s father-in-law has been awaiting travel booking to the United States.

13

157. Doe 3 is Muslim, and feels insulted and betrayed by the new refugee restrictions

14 affecting Iraqi nationals. The new restrictions make him feel that the government views all

15 Muslims as national security threats on the basis of their religion. He also feels it is unfair for his

16 father-in-law to be excluded from the United States after dutifully serving U.S. military

17 operations and democratization efforts. Doe 3 witnesses the emotional toll that the prolonged

18 separation is taking on his wife and daughter, and on the rest of Doe 2’s family. Doe 3’s wife

19 often cries because her father is stranded in Iraq, and fears that his life is in danger.

20

Jane Doe 4

21

158. Jane Doe 4 (“Doe 4”) is a national of, and currently lives in, Egypt. Doe 4 is and

22 has been represented in her refugee application by IRAP in the ordinary course of IRAP’s work

23 as a legal services provider. As a transgender woman in Egypt she faces sexual harassment,

24 physical and sexual violence, including multiple attempted rapes, and death threats. The

25 Egyptian government has recently targeted, detained, imprisoned, and tortured members of the

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –32
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 33 of 44

1 transgender community because of their gender identity. A few months ago the Egyptian State

2 Security came to Doe 4’s home and took her away to be interrogated about her gender identity.

3

159. Before the new refugee restrictions, Doe 4’s refugee application was receiving

4 expedited processing by the USRAP because she is at high risk of persecution. She was referred

5 for resettlement to the United States by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo on or around June 2017. Doe

6 4 had an urgent pre-screening interview with IOM in September 2017 and completed her USCIS

7 interview the following day. On information and belief, transgender refugee applicants

8 presenting urgent risks typically travel to the United States between approximately six months to

9 one year after the date of access to the USRAP. Due to the urgent nature of her case, on

10 November 8, 2017, Doe 4’s counsel requested that her application be granted a case-by-case

11 foreign policy waiver of the suspension of refugee processing for nationals from SAO countries,

12 but has not been given an indication of how or whether her request will be assessed.

13

160. When Doe 4 learned of the new refugee restrictions she was devastated. She is

14 terrified for her life every day that she must remain in Egypt. She cannot flee because the gender

15 on her identity documents does not match her current appearance. She has no financial resources

16 or income in Egypt, and faces imminent danger due to her increased risk of homelessness. Doe 4

17 also feels that Refugee Ban 3.0 targets her as a Muslim refugee on the basis of her religion.

18

Jane Doe 5

19

161. Jane Doe 5 (“Doe 5”) is an Iraqi national currently living in Iraq. Doe 5 is and has

20 been represented in her refugee application by IRAP in the ordinary course of IRAP’s work as a

21 legal services provider. Because of her employment as an interpreter and administrator for

22 American companies, she is in danger every day. After receiving death threats in 2014 due to her

23 work, in 2015 she was kidnapped by militants, who held and raped her for over a month. When

24 she was finally released, her captors warned her to stop working for Americans, but she has

25 refused to do so, as she has no other means of supporting herself. Doe 5’s husband divorced her

26 three weeks after her release because of the stigma associated with rape.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –33
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 34 of 44

1

162. In 2012, Doe 5 applied to DAP and received her second interview with USCIS on

2 July 20, 2016. She has completed multiple stages of the admissions process, including two

3 interviews with USCIS and a medical check.

4

163. The other members of Doe 5’s immediate family have all moved to the United

5 States, including her mother, father, two sisters and brother. She remains close to her family, and

6 being separated from them is very painful for her.

7

164. Since Refugee Ban 3.0 was issued, Doe 5 has felt increasingly hopeless about her

8 situation in Iraq, where her life is constantly in danger. With the refugee restrictions in place, she

9 worries that she will never be able to travel to the United States.

10

165. Doe 5 is Muslim, and she believes that the purpose of the Refugee Ban is intended

11 to prevent Muslims from entering the United States. She feels that she is being treated as a

12 potential threat to the United States on the basis of her religion, and this is causing her increased

13 anxiety and exacerbating her depression.

14

Jane Doe 6

15

166. Jane Doe 6 (“Doe 6”) is a United States citizen and is Doe 5’s sister. Doe 6 left

16 Iraq in March 2006 and resettled in the United States in 2008. She currently lives with her

17 husband and children in Houston, Texas, where she runs a successful limousine business.

18

167. Doe 6 is very close to her sister and took care of her sister when her sister was a

19 child. They have been living apart since Doe 6 left Iraq, and she has only seen her sister one time

20 since then—in the summer of 2014, when Doe 6 traveled to Turkey. When she has the

21 opportunity to talk to her sister, the calls are emotionally difficult for both of them. Doe 6 is

22 anxious about her sister’s fate, and feels that she cannot fully enjoy her life in the United States

23 while her sister is in constant danger.

24

168. When Doe 6 learned of Refugee Ban 3.0, she felt brokenhearted. She tried to

25 comfort her sister, but she now believes that it will be many years before they will see each

26 other. Doe 6’s anxiety about her sister’s safety increases the longer her sister remains in Iraq.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –34
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 35 of 44

1

169. Doe 6 is Muslim, and she believes that the purpose of Refugee Ban 3.0 is to

2 prevent Muslims, like her sister, from entering the United States. She feels that the anti-Muslim

3 policies behind suspending refugee admissions perpetuate stereotypes that all Iraqis are

4 dangerous, and she worries that these stereotypes will impact how people treat her family, and

5 especially her children.

6

John Doe 7

7

170. John Doe 7 (“Doe 7”) is a lawful permanent resident who was admitted to the

8 United States as a refugee from Iraq in 2014. He currently lives in King County, Washington and

9 recently had to stop working due to declining heath. Doe 7 has an approved follow-to-join

10 petition for his nineteen-year-old Iraqi son from his first marriage. Doe 7 is Muslim, as is his

11 family.

12

171. Doe 7 fled Iraq in 2012 because he faced persecution and death threats from

13 members of one of the Islamic parties in the Iraqi government. He was forced to flee to Turkey,

14 where he applied for and was granted refugee status with the United Nations. He was

15 subsequently joined by his wife and two of his children in Turkey, and they were able to come to

16 the United States together.

17

172. Doe 7 filed the follow-to-join petition for his son in November 2015. The I-730

18 petition was subsequently approved, and Doe 7’s son completed his interview and fingerprinting.

19 In November 2016, Doe 7’s son was assured for resettlement in the United States by HIAS and

20 Jewish Family Service of Seattle, and has been awaiting travel arrangements since that time.

21

173. Knowing that his son’s follow-to-join petition is indefinitely suspended makes

22 Doe 7 feel hopeless and like his plan to reunite with his son in the United States is fading away.

23 He also fears that his son’s application will be affected by the suspension of refugee admissions

24 from SAO country nationals, including Iraq. It is clear to Doe 7 that the purpose of the Executive

25 Order and Memorandum is to prevent Muslims like him and his family from entering the United

26 States. Doe 7 is too scared to travel to Iraq to visit his son, even though he is able to do so,

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –35
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 36 of 44

1 because he fears he will not be readmitted to the United States. He has not bought a house in the

2 United States because he is not sure that Muslims will be allowed to remain in the country.

3

Jewish Family Service of Seattle

4

174. Plaintiff Jewish Family Service of Seattle (“JFS-S”) is a Washington non-profit

5 corporation with its principal place of business in Washington State. JFS-S has an uninterrupted

6 125-year history of service to refugees—the most vulnerable Jewish and non-Jewish individuals

7 and families from around the globe. JFS-S was founded in 1892 with a mission of helping newly

8 arrived Jewish immigrants and refugees establish their lives in the Puget Sound Region.

9

175. The Torah commands Jewish people to “welcome the stranger,” a teaching that

10 compels JFS-S to serve and protect refugees and to oppose the religious discrimination and

11 unjust targeting of Muslims addressed in this lawsuit. Today, one way that JFS-S answers this

12 command is by resettling and serving refugees from Afghanistan, Burma, the Democratic

13 Republic of Congo, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, and Ukraine. JFS-S’s most intensive

14 services to refugees are delivered through its reception and placement program. One other

15 important aspect of refugee resettlement is helping current and former resettlement clients

16 reunite with family who remain overseas.

17

176. In federal fiscal year (“FFY”) 2016, JFS-S resettled 290 refugees. In FFY2017,

18 JFS-S resettled 333 refugees. For FFY2018, JFS-S has allocated resources to resettle 285

19 refugees, in plans it developed with the Department of State and HIAS, but fears that this latest

20 executive order will result in the resettlement of far fewer refugees. Many of the refugees

21 resettled by JFS-S are from Muslim-majority countries that Refugee Ban 3.0 will impact,

22 including Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Mali, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.

23

177. Refugee Ban 3.0 burdens and—as to many refugees—would directly end JFS-S’s

24 ability to fulfill its mission in accordance with its religious values. Similarly, in light of the

25 history of persecution that Jewish people have suffered in many times and places throughout the

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –36
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 37 of 44

1 world, helping refugees is a critical part of how Jewish people (including JFS-S, its volunteers

2 and its staff) express their religious beliefs and teachings.

3

178. If JFS-S is no longer able to provide resettlement assistance for clients who are

4 banned by Refugee Ban 3.0, JFS-S will no longer receive funding support for these resettlement

5 activities, and JFS-S’s staff positions will be at risk. If Refugee Ban 3.0 remains in effect, JFS-S

6 may be forced to lay off at least one employee, and possibly more, or will have to absorb this

7 loss through attrition within the greater organization or through a decrease in quality of service,

8 as staff will have to be reassigned to different positions to perform different duties. All of these

9 alternatives thwart JFS-S’s organizational mission and sincerely held religious beliefs, even as

10 JFS-S must grapple with increased expenditures resulting from Refugee Ban 3.0, including

11 devoting staff resources to address the concerns of clients and their family members.

12

179. JFS-S has diverted organizational resources to identify and counteract the

13 negative effects of Refugee Ban 3.0. JFS-S’s clients include Muslim follow-to-join refugee

14 petitioners and beneficiaries. Several of JFS-S’s clients are petitioning for their family members

15 through follow-to-join petitions. Those clients are now unsure about whether their family

16 members will be permitted to join them in the United States. Refugee Ban 3.0 will undoubtedly

17 require JFS-S to divert resources to address inquiries and concerns arising out of Refugee Ban

18 3.0’s implementation. JFS-S staff have been spending at least 25% of their time responding to

19 concerns and inquiries from Muslim and other clients since President Trump issued EO–1. JFS-S

20 has every reason to expect that this percentage of diverted time will not only continue, but will

21 expand significantly in the coming weeks and months as knowledge of and fear of Refugee Ban

22 3.0 grows. These resources could have otherwise been spent on fulfilling the organization’s

23 goals.

24

180. JFS-S asserts claims on behalf of itself and its clients. The rights of clients that

25 JFS-S seeks to vindicate here are inextricably bound up with its organizational mission and

26 purpose, and its clients face numerous hurdles to bringing this suit in their own name. JFS-S

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –37
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 38 of 44

1 clients fear that they will never be reunited with their family members abroad, many of whom

2 live in dangerous and life-threatening situations. But many of them are concerned about sharing

3 the details of their situations publicly, for fear that it could affect their immigration status or

4 applications, or those of their relatives. They are also afraid because of the current anti-refugee

5 and anti-Muslim climate in the United States. They face multiple obstacles to asserting their

6 legal rights, such as language barriers and unfamiliarity with American law and customs.

7

Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley

8

181. Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley (“JFS-SV”) is a faith-based organization

9 that was founded in 1978. Since its founding, JFS-SV has assisted nearly 6,000 refugees with

10 resettlement in the United States. JFS-SV’s commitment to assisting refugees with resettlement

11 grows out of its commitment to Jewish values and Torah teachings, which compel it to “welcome

12 the stranger.” JFS-SV serves refugees and persecuted peoples of all faiths and nationalities

13 around the globe. Its client base includes refugees abroad and in the United States who are from

14 Iran, Iraq, Syrian, Eritrea, Congo, Cuba, Egypt, China, Sri Lanka, Burma, Ukraine, Russia,

15 Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan.

16

182. JFS-SV is committed to empowering the individuals and families they serve by

17 providing quality human services inspired by Jewish values. JFS-SV administers a number of

18 programs that serve refugees and the broader community, including Refugee Resettlement and

19 Vocational Services, Aging with Dignity Services, Adult and Family Services, and Volunteer

20 Engagement Services. JFS-SV’s services are available without regard to race, religion, ethnicity,

21 sexual orientation, or ability to pay.

22

183. In FFY 2016, JFS-SV resettled 118 refugees. In FFY2017, in the original plans

23 developed with and approved by the Department of State, JFS-SV planned to resettle 165

24 refugees and SIVs and actually resettled, due to the effect of executive orders of Donald Trump,

25 only 67 refugees. For FFY2018, JFS-SV has allocated resources to resettle 65 refugees and 35

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –38
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 39 of 44

1 SIVs, in plans it developed with the Department of State and HIAS, but fears that this latest

2 executive order will result in the resettlement of even fewer refugees.

3

184. Implementation of Refugee Ban 3.0 has caused substantial harm to JFS-SV and

4 its clients, and will continue to harm them. JFS-SV has clients with pending follow-to-join

5 petitions for family members abroad who are also nationals of countries listed on the SAO list.

6 Now these clients do not know when they can reunite with their family members.

7

185. JFS-SV projects that Refugee Ban 3.0 will have a catastrophic impact on its

8 annual budget because a large percentage of the individuals who JFS-SV is planning to resettle

9 will no longer be permitted to arrive in the United States. For each refugee that JFS-SV resettles,

10 it receives certain funds from the government. Income related to refugee services constitutes

11 36% of JFS-SV’s revenue. If JFS-SV were to lose this much of its budget, it would be forced to

12 lay off at least 6 of its 17-person staff and would lose significant support in terms of volunteers

13 and partners that the organization has cultivated over the many decades of its work because there

14 would no longer be JFS-SV staff persons to manage those relationships. Such a dramatic

15 reduction in JFS-SV’s staff, representing all of JFS-SV’s staff working on refugee resettlement,

16 would fundamentally alter the work that JFS-SV could undertake and would grind to a halt their

17 refugee resettlement work, a core part of JFS-SV’s mission.

18

186. JFS-SV asserts claims on behalf of itself and its clients. The rights of clients that

19 JFS-SV seeks to vindicate here are inextricably bound up with its organizational mission and

20 purpose. JFS-SV clients include Muslim follow-to-join refugee petitioners and beneficiaries.

21 Moreover, many of its clients are not proficient in English, are unfamiliar with the U.S. legal

22 system, and fear retaliation against themselves and their family members should they join a

23 public lawsuit. Its clients therefore face numerous hurdles to bringing this suit in their own

24 name.

25

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –39
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 40 of 44

1

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

2

187. Plaintiffs Afkab Mohamed Hussein and Does 1-7 bring this action as a class

3 action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1) and (b)(2), on behalf of themselves

4 and all other similarly situated persons for whom Refugee Ban 3.0 either interferes with their

5 ability to resettle in the United States or impedes their family reunification. This class includes:

6

a. Individuals in the United States who are family members of individuals

7

overseas in the USRAP who are nationals of (and stateless persons who

8

last habitually resided in) SAO countries (“SAO Family Sub-Class”).

9

b. Individuals overseas in the USRAP who are nationals of (and stateless

10

persons who last habitually resided in) SAO countries (“SAO Sub-Class”);

11

c. Individuals in the United States who are petitioners for pending follow-to-

12

join petitioners (“FTJ Sub-Class”);

13

188. Separate Subclasses may be appropriate for the Class defined in the preceding

14 paragraph.

15

189. The Plaintiff Class, including Subclasses, is so numerous that joinder is

16 impracticable. On information and belief, the Plaintiff Class consists of well over 40 putative

17 class members. Over the last few years, approximately 2,500 refugees were annually admitted

18 through the FTJ process. In FY17, over 20,000 refugees from the 11 SAO countries arrived in

19 the United States.

20

190. The claims of the Plaintiff Class and Subclass members share common issues of

21 law, including but not limited to whether Refugee Ban 3.0 violates the Immigration and

22 Nationality Act (“INA”), the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), the First Amendment, and

23 the Fifth Amendment.

24

191. The claims of the Plaintiff Class and Subclass members share common issues of

25 fact, including but not limited to whether Refugee Ban 3.0 is being or will be enforced so as to

26 prevent them or their family members from entering the United States from abroad.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –40
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 41 of 44

1

192. The claims or defenses of the named Plaintiffs are typical of the claims or

2 defenses of members of the Plaintiff Class and Subclasses.

3

193. The named Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the

4 Plaintiff Class and Subclasses. The named Plaintiffs have no interest that is now or may be

5 potentially antagonistic to the interests of the Plaintiff Class and Subclasses. The attorneys

6 representing the named Plaintiffs include experienced attorneys who are considered able

7 practitioners in federal civil litigation, including civil rights litigation. These attorneys should be

8 appointed as class counsel.

9

194. Defendants have acted, have threatened to act, and will act on grounds generally

10 applicable to the Plaintiff Class and Subclasses, thereby making final injunctive and declaratory

11 relief appropriate to the class as a whole. The Plaintiff Class and potential Subclasses may

12 therefore be properly certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2).

13

195. Prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Plaintiff Class and

14 Subclasses would create the risk of inconsistent or varying adjudications and would establish

15 incompatible standards of conduct for individual members of the Plaintiff Class. The Plaintiff

16 Class and Subclasses may therefore be properly certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

17 23(b)(1)).

18

CAUSES OF ACTION

19

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT & ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT

20

(On Behalf of All Plaintiffs, including the Class)

21

196. Defendants’ suspension of the USRAP through Refugee Ban 3.0, including the

22 suspension of the FTJ refugee process and the suspension in processing and admission of

23 nationals of (and stateless persons who last habitually resided in) SAO countries, violates the

24 INA, including 8 U.S.C. § 1182 and 8 U.S.C. § 1157(c)(2)(A).

25

197. Defendants’ suspension of the USRAP through Refugee Ban 3.0, including the

26 suspension of the FTJ refugee process and the suspension in processing and admission of

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –41
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 42 of 44

1 nationals of (and stateless persons who last habitually resided in) SAO countries, constitutes final

2 agency action and is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance

3 with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity; and in excess of

4 statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right, and should therefore be

5 set aside pursuant to the APA, 5 U.S.C. §§ 706(2)(A)-(C).

6

198. Defendants’ suspension of the USRAP through Refugee Ban 3.0, including the

7 suspension of the FTJ refugee process and the suspension in processing and admission of

8 nationals of (and stateless persons who last habitually resided in) SAO countries, is a legislative

9 rule that violates the procedural requirements of 5 U.S.C. § 553(b) and should be set aside as

10 issued without observance of notice and comment procedure required by law, in violation of the

11 APA, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(D).

12

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

13

FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION - ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE (On Behalf of Hussein, Vaught, Doe 3, Doe 6, Doe 7, JFS-S, JFS-SV, the FTJ Sub-Class,

14

and the SAO Family Sub-Class)

15

199. Defendants’ suspension of the USRAP through Refugee Ban 3.0, including the

16 suspension of the FTJ refugee process and the suspension in processing and admission of

17 nationals of (and stateless persons who last habitually resided in) SAO countries, violates the

18 Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

19

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION - EQUAL PROTECTION

20

(On Behalf of Hussein, Doe 3, Doe 6, Doe 7, JFS-S, JFS-SV, the FTJ Sub-Class, and the

21

SAO Family Sub-Class)

200. Defendants’ suspension of the USRAP through Refugee Ban 3.0, including the 22

suspension of the FTJ refugee process and the suspension in processing and admission of 23

nationals of (and stateless persons who last habitually resided in) SAO countries, violates the 24

equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. 25

Constitution. 26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –42
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 43 of 44

1

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION –DUE PROCESS

2

(On Behalf of Hussein, Doe 7, JFS-S, JFS-SV, and the FTJ Sub-Class)

3

201. Defendants’ suspension of the FTJ refugee process through Refugee Ban 3.0

4 violates the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

5

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

6

ACCARDI DOCTRINE & ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT (On Behalf of Hussein, Doe 7, JFS-S, JFS-SV, and the FTJ Sub-Class)

7

202. Defendants’ suspension of the FTJ refugee process through Refugee Ban 3.0

8 violates agency procedures, including those at 8 C.F.R. § 207.7. The Memorandum should

9 therefore be set aside under the principle articulated in United States ex. rel. Accardi v.

10 Shaughnessy, 347 U.S. 260 (1954).

11

203. The Memorandum’s failure to comply with the issuing agencies’ regulations

12 renders it arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law,

13 in violation of 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A).

14

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

15

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for the following relief:

16

A. A preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining Defendants, their officials,

17 agents, employees, assigns, and all persons acting in concert or participating with them from

18 implementing or enforcing any portion of the Memorandum;

19

B. A declaration that the Memorandum is, in its entirety, unlawful and invalid;

20

C. A determination that the Plaintiffs’ claims may properly be maintained as a class

21 action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(1) and (b)(2);

22

D. An order awarding Plaintiffs costs of suit, and reasonable attorneys’ fees and

23 expenses pursuant to any applicable law;

24

E. Such other and further relief as the Court deems equitable, just, and proper.

25

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –43
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-01707 Document 1 Filed 11/13/17 Page 44 of 44

1 Respectfully submitted,
2

DATED: November 13, 2017

3 /s/ David Burman David Burman, WSBA No. 10611
4 Lauren Watts Staniar, WSBA No. 48741
5 Tyler Roberts, WSBA No. 52688 Perkins Coie LLP
6 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900 Seattle, WA 98101-3099
7 Telephone: 206.359.8000
Facsimile: 206.359.9000 8 dburman@perkinscoie.com
9 lstaniar@perkinscoie.com troberts@perkinscoie.com
10 Mariko Hirose*
11 Deepa Alagesan* Linda Evarts*
12 Kathryn C. Meyer* International Refugee Assistance Project
13 40 Rector Street, 9th Floor New York, NY 10006
14 Tel: (646) 459-3044 mhirose@refugeerights.org
15 dalagesan@refugeerights.org levarts@refugeerights.org
16 kmeyer@refugeerights.org
17 Elizabeth Sweet* Mark Hetfield*
18 HIAS, Inc. 1300 Spring Street, Suite 500
19 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Tel: 301-844-7300
20 liz.sweet@hias.org mark.hetfield@hias.org
21 * Application for admission Pro Hac Vice
22 forthcoming

Justin B. Cox* National Immigration Law Center PO Box 170208 Atlanta, GA 30317 Tel: (678) 279-5441 Fax: (213) 639-3911 cox@nilc.org
Melissa S. Keaney* Esther Sung* Karen C. Tumlin* National Immigration Law Center 3450 Wilshire Blvd, #108-62 Los Angeles, CA 90010 Tel: (213) 639-3900 Fax: (213) 639-3911 tumlin@nilc.org keaney@nilc.org sung@nilc.org
Lauren E. Aguiar* Mollie M. Kornreich* Abigail E. Davis* Four Times Square New York, NY 10036 Tel: (212) 735-3000 Fax: (212) 735-2000 lauren.aguiar@probonolaw.com mollie.kornreich@probonolaw.com abigail.sheehan@probonolaw.com

23

Counsel for Plaintiffs

24

25

26

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (No. 17-1707) –44
137635206.1

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

 
 Case 2:17-cv-01707-JLR Document 105 Filed 11/13/19 Page 1 of 2

1
2

3

4

5

6

7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

8

AT SEATTLE

9

10

JOHN DOES, et al.,

11

Plaintiffs,

v.

12

DONALD TRUMP, et al.,
13

Defendants.
14

JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES, et

15

al.,

CASE NO. Cl7-0178JLR ORDER OF DISMISSAL (RELATING TO BOTH CASES)
CASE NO Cl7-1707JLR

16

Plaintiffs,

17

v.

18

DONALD TRUMP, et al.,

19

Defendants.

20

The court having been notified of the settlement of this matter and it appearing

21 that no issue remains for the court's determination:

22

ORDER-I

Case 2:17-cv-01707-JLR Document 105 Filed 11/13/19 Page 2 of 2

1

IT IS ORDERED that this action and all claims asserted herein are DISMISSED

2 with prejudice and without costs to any party.

3

In the event settlement is not perfected, any party may move to reopen the case,

4 provided such motion is filed within 60 days of the date of this order. Any trial date and

5 pretrial dates previously set are hereby VACATED.

~

6

Dated this \'3 day ofNovember, 2019.

7

8

.ROBART

ates District Judge 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

ORDER-2

 
 Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 1 of 41

1

THE HONORABLE JAMES L. ROBART

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10 JOHN DOE, et al.,

11

12

v.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

CASE NO. C17-0178JLR

Plaintiffs,

STIPULATED DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 41(A)(1)(A)(II)

13 DONALD TRUMP, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15 16 JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES, et al.,

CASE NO. C17-1707JLR

17

18

v.

Plaintiffs,

(RELATING TO BOTH CASES)

19 DONALD TRUMP, et al., 20 21

Defendants.

22

23

24

25

26

STIPULATED DISMISSAL (2:17-cv-00178-JLR)

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 2 of 41

1 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between all parties, through their
2 respective counsel, that the above-captioned actions are voluntarily dismissed, with prejudice,
3 against all Defendants, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Each party
4 shall bear its own fees and costs, and Plaintiffs may enforce the terms of the Settlement
5 Agreement entered into in this case (attached as Exhibit A) as described therein.
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

STIPULATED DISMISSAL - 1 Case No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 3 of 41

1 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY:

2 s/ Lauren Watts Staniar

3

David Burman, WSBA No. 10611 Lauren Watts Staniar, WSBA No. 48741

4 Tyler Roberts, WSBA No. 52688 Perkins Coie LLP

5 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900

Seattle, WA 98101-3099 6 Telephone: 206.359.8000

7

Facsimile: 206.359.9000 dburman@perkinscoie.com

8 lstaniar@perkinscoie.com troberts@perkinscoie.com
9

Max S. Wolson, Pro Hac Vice 10 National Immigration Law Center

11 3450 Wilshire Blvd, #108-62 Los Angeles, CA 90010

12 Tel: (213) 639-3900 Fax: (213) 639-3911
13 wolson@nilc.org

14 Lauren E. Aguiar, Pro Hac Vice

15 Mollie M. Kornreich, Pro Hac Vice Abigail E. Davis, Pro Hac Vice

16 Four Times Square

New York, NY 10036 17 Tel: (212) 735-3000

18

Fax: (212) 735-2000 lauren.aguiar@probonolaw.com

19 mollie.kornreich@probonolaw.com abigail.sheehan@probonolaw.com

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DATED this 10th day of February, 2020
s/ Mariko Hirose Mariko Hirose, Pro Hac Vice Deepa Alagesan, Pro Hac Vice Linda Evarts, Pro Hac Vice Kathryn C. Meyer, Pro Hac Vice International Refugee Assistance Project 40 Rector Street, 9th Floor New York, NY 10006 Tel: (646) 459-3044 mhirose@refugeerights.org dalagesan@refugeerights.org levarts@refugeerights.org kmeyer@refugeerights.org
Justin B. Cox, Pro Hac Vice International Refugee Assistance Project PO Box 170208 Atlanta, GA 30317 Tel: (678) 279-5441 jcox@refugeerights.org
Melissa S. Keaney, Pro Hac Vice International Refugee Assistance Project PO Box 2291 Fair Oaks, CA 95628 Tel: (916) 546-6125 mkeaney@refugeerights.org
Elizabeth Sweet, Pro Hac Vice Mark Hetfield, Pro Hac Vice HIAS, Inc. 1300 Spring Street, Suite 500 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Tel: 301-844-7300 liz.sweet@hias.org mark.hetfield@hias.org
Counsel for Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service, et al.

STIPULATED DISMISSAL - 2 Case No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 4 of 41

1

2 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION 3 OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION

4 By: /s/ Lisa Nowlin Lisa Nowlin, WSBA # 51512

5

P.O. Box 2728

Seattle, WA 98111

6

Tel.: (206) 624-2184

7

Email: lnowlin@aclu-wa.org

8

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.

By: /s/ Lynn Lincoln Sarko By: /s/ Tana Lin By: /s/ Derek W. Loeser By: /s/ Alison S. Gaffney
Lynn Lincoln Sarko, WSBA # 16569 Tana Lin, WSBA # 35271 Derek W. Loeser, WSBA # 24274 Alison S. Gaffney, WSBA # 45565 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101 Tel.: (206) 623-1900 Fax: (206) 623-3384 Email: lsarko@kellerrohrback.com
tlin@kellerrohrback.com dloeser@kellerrohrback.com agaffney@kellerrohrback.com

By: /s/ Laurie B. Ashton

N

Laurie B. Ashton (admitted pro hac vice)

3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400

Phoenix, AZ 85012-2600

Tel.: (602) 248-0088

Fax: (602) 248-2822

Email: lashton@kellerrohrback.com

By: /s/ Alison Chase

e

Alison Chase (admitted pro hac vice)

1129 State Street, Suite 8

Santa Barbara, CA 93101

Tel.: (805) 456-1496

Fax: (805) 456-1497

Email: achase@kellerrohrback.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Cooperating Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington Foundation

STIPULATED DISMISSAL - 3 Case No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 5 of 41

1 JOSEPH H. HUNT
2 Assistant Attorney General
3 AUGUST E. FLENTJE 4 Special Counsel

5 JENNIFER D. RICKETTS Director, Federal Programs Branch
6

7

JOSHUA E. GARDNER Special Counsel, Federal Programs Branch

8

9 __/s/ Joshua Kolsky______________ JOSHUA KOLSKY
10 KEVIN SNELL 11 Trial Attorneys
U.S. Department of Justice 12 Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch
1100 L Street, NW 13 Washington, DC 20005
Tel: (202) 305-7664 14 Fax: (202) 616-8470 15 Email: joshua.kolsky@usdoj.gov

16 Counsel for Defendants

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

STIPULATED DISMISSAL - 4 Case No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 6 of 41
Exhibit A

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 7 of 41
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This Settlement Agreement (“Settlement Agreement”) is entered into between all
Plaintiffs in Doe et al. v. Trump et al., No. 17-0178 (W.D. Wash) (“Doe Case”), all Plaintiffs in
Jewish Family Service of Seattle et al. v. Trump et al., No. 17-1707 (W.D. Wash.) (“JFS Case”),1
(hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs” and “Cases”), and all Defendants in the
Cases.2 Plaintiffs and Defendants are referred to herein as “the Parties.” Plaintiffs in the Doe
Case filed a third amended complaint on November 6, 2017 (ECF No. 42), and Plaintiffs in the
JFS Case filed a complaint on November 13, 2017 (ECF No. 1 in Docket Number 17-1707).3
The Cases relate to Executive Order 13,815, 82 Fed. Reg. 50,055 (Oct. 24, 2017), and an
accompanying memorandum by Defendants Secretary of State, Secretary of Homeland Security,
and Director of National Intelligence that was dated October 23, 2017 (“Agency Memo”).
The Parties mutually desire to resolve all of the claims asserted by Plaintiffs in the Cases
without the need for further litigation, and without any admission of liability by any party. The
Parties do hereby settle all claims, issues, complaints, or actions that Plaintiffs have or could
have asserted in the Case in which they are Plaintiffs against Defendants, or any of Defendants’
employees, including but not limited to past and present U.S. Government officials and
1 The settling Plaintiffs in the Doe Case are the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia, Joseph Doe, Jeffrey Doe, and, for purposes of this Settlement Agreement, includes Sophonie Bizimana, a declarant in the Doe Case. Plaintiffs in the JFS Case are Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, Allen Vaught, Afkab Mohamed Hussein, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, John Doe 3, Jane Doe 4, Jane Doe 5, Jane Doe 6, and John Doe 7. The identities of the pseudonymous plaintiffs, which Defendants agree to use only for the purposes of implementing and enforcing this Settlement Agreement, are listed in Exhibit B to this Agreement.
2 Defendants in the Doe Case are Donald Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Chad Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security; U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Mark A. Morgan, in his official capacity as Acting Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Adele Fasano, in her official capacity as Field Director of the Seattle Field Office of U.S. Customs and Border Protection; U.S. Department of State; Michael Pompeo, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; the Office of the Director of National Intelligence; and Joseph Maguire, in his official capacity as Acting Director of National Intelligence. Defendants in the JFS Case are Donald Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Chad Wolf, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security; U.S. Department of State; Michael Pompeo, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; the Office of the Director of National Intelligence; and Joseph Maguire, in his official capacity as Acting Director of National Intelligence.
3 The Cases were consolidated (ECF No. 61). Unless otherwise specified, ECF citations herein refer to civil docket number 17-0178 (W.D. Wash.).
1

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 8 of 41
employees, including but not limited to past and present U.S. Government officials and employees, prior to the date that this Settlement Agreement is executed by the Parties (“Effective Date.”).
1. Consideration by Defendants: In consideration for the promises of Plaintiffs set forth herein, Defendants agree as follows:
a. The U.S. Department of State (“State”) and United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) shall prioritize the processing of the cases identified in Exhibit A,4 to the extent the individuals who are included in such cases have not been granted or denied refugee admission or have pending Requests for Review (“Pending Cases”). Unless otherwise stated herein, prioritization means moving an individual to the front of other similarly situated cases in the processing queue for each applicable processing step; non-similarly situated cases are urgent cases based on medical or other urgent humanitarian needs. In the context of interviews, prioritization means offering the individual the opportunity to have an interview at the next time a circuit ride is deployed to the individual’s location or, where possible, conducting the re-interview by videoconference. The Pending Cases in Exhibit A include I-590, Registration as Classification for a Refugee, cases in which one or more case members require a Security Advisory Opinion (“SAO case”), and cases that involve an I-730, Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition cases (“FTJ case”). The Pending Cases in Exhibit A are comprised of the following cases: i. Seven (7) FTJ cases and forty-one (40) SAO cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 1
by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are the cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the cases that were designated Ready for Departure in State’s Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System (“WRAPS”) on October 23, 2017;
4 Exhibit A has been designated as confidential under the January 31, 2019 Stipulated Protective Order. See Doe, Dkt. No. 177.
2

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 9 of 41
ii. Fifty-eight (58) FTJ cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 2 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the cases that were designated “pending completion granted” in USCIS’s Case and Activity Management for International Operations (“CAMINO”) database as of December 23, 2017;
iii. Two (2) FTJ cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 3 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the cases that, according to the USCIS CAMINO database, had a medical clearance expire between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018;
iv. Twenty-eight (28) FTJ cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 4 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the cases that, according to the USCIS CAMINO database, had a security clearance expire between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018;
v. Fourteen (14) SAO cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 5 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the thirty-two (32) cases previously selected by Plaintiffs from among those in the digital stamping queue in State’s WRAPS system between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018;
vi. The six (6) cases listed in Exhibit A-Part 6: cases UG-941117, UG-762618, UG762628, UG-762624 and UG-762607, which are the case numbers of Doe Case plaintiff Sophonie Bizimana and case numbers associated with that case, and case
3

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 10 of 41
number KE-529632, which is the case number associated with Doe Case plaintiff Jeffrey Doe;5 vii. The seven (7) cases listed in Exhibit A-Part 7. Case numbers EG-109707, IZ212849, EG-113835, IZ-138422, IZ-303562, KE569925, and KE-569926, which are the cases of JFS Case plaintiffs Doe 1, Doe 2, Doe 4, Doe 5, Doe 7, and Afkab Mohamed Hussein; and viii. The twenty-two (22) cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 8, by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the thirty-three (33) cases that had an assurance to Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia on October 23, 2017 or January 31, 2018. b. For SAO cases within Exhibit A, the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration at State (“State/PRM”) shall prioritize the remaining processing steps for such cases, as applicable. Specifically, State/PRM will: (1) instruct Resettlement Support Centers (“RSCs”) to upgrade the urgency level to level one for these cases; (2) instruct RSCs to request any pending security checks where security checks are needed; (3) ask the United States government agencies who provide information to State and USCIS in support of refugee vetting (“Vetting Support Agencies”) to prioritize the Pending Cases for whom security checks are or have been requested, with the understanding that State/PRM cannot require a Vetting Support Agency to complete a security check in any particular timeframe; (4) instruct RSCs to prioritize medical exams where such exams are required; and (5) request resettlement agencies to promptly submit an assurance within one week of receiving medical information.
5 Should Doe case plaintiff Joseph Doe provide Defendants with the refugee case number for his mother within 60 days of the Effective Date, Defendants will make a good faith effort to prioritize the processing of her case in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, to the extent that the refugee case number is valid and to the extent that her case was already pending on the Effective Date.
4

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 11 of 41
c. For FTJ cases within Exhibit A that are processed in Kenya, Burundi, Uganda or Thailand, State/PRM shall prioritize the remaining processing steps for such cases, as applicable. Specifically, State/PRM will: (1) instruct RSCs to upgrade the urgency level to level one for these cases; (2) instruct RSCs to work with USCIS to facilitate scheduling of interviews; (3) instruct RSCs to request any pending security checks where security checks are needed; (4) ask the Vetting Support Agencies to prioritize the Pending Cases for whom security checks are or have been requested, with the understanding that State/PRM cannot require a Vetting Support Agency to complete a security check in any particular timeframe; (5) instruct RSCs to prioritize medical exams where such exams are required; and (6) request resettlement agencies to promptly submit an assurance within one week of receiving medical information.
d. For FTJ cases within Exhibit A that are not processed in Kenya, Burundi, Uganda or Thailand, State/PRM shall prioritize the following processing step: request resettlement agencies to promptly submit an assurance within one week of receiving medical information.
e. For FTJ cases within Exhibit A that are processed by USCIS, USCIS will prioritize the remaining processing steps for such cases, as applicable. Specifically, USCIS will: (1) prioritize interviewing or re-interviewing these cases; (2) ask the Vetting Support Agencies to prioritize these cases that are pending security checks with the understanding that USCIS cannot require a Vetting Support Agency to complete a security check in any particular timeframe, or, for cases pending SAOs, coordinate with State to request prioritization; (3) prioritize requesting medical exams on these cases; (4) prioritize submitting these cases for assurances; and (5) prioritize preparation or submission of these cases for travel documentation.6
6 For the case of Plaintiff Afkab Mohamed Hussein, in addition to any other prioritization required by this Settlement Agreement, USCIS will prioritize consideration of Mr. Hussein’s child born in January 2020 to be authorized for parole into the United States, provided that an application for parole is submitted to USCIS within 120 days of the Effective Date.
5

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 12 of 41
f. For any FTJ cases within Exhibit A that are processed by the Bureau of Consular Affairs at State (“State/CA”), State/CA will prioritize the remaining processing steps for such cases, as applicable. Specifically, State/CA will: (1) instruct consular sections to expedite the scheduling of interviews for these cases; (2) instruct consular sections to request any pending security checks for these cases where security checks are needed; (3) ask the Vetting Support Agencies to prioritize these cases for whom security checks are or have been requested, with the understanding that State/CA cannot require a Vetting Support Agency to complete a security check in any particular timeframe; (4) instruct consular sections to request and prioritize medical exams for these cases where such exams are required; and (5) request resettlement agencies to promptly submit an assurance for these cases within one week of receiving medical information.
g. For any Pending Cases that are pending USCIS and/or State review of derogatory information and/or pending final decision on the refugee adjudication or follow-to-join refugee travel eligibility determination or I-730 petition, USCIS and/or State will prioritize review of these cases before other similarly situated cases. Resolving security checks may include talking to and receiving responses from other partners. For those still pending security checks from Vetting Support Agencies, USCIS and/or State will ask the Vetting Support Agencies to prioritize those cases with the understanding that USCIS and/or State cannot require a Vetting Support Agency to complete a security check in any particular timeframe.
h. For any Pending Case that is eligible to submit a Request for Review (“RFR”) and that may be denied after December 3, 2019, the individuals included in such case will have 90 days after receipt of the Notice of Ineligibility for Resettlement to submit an RFR which will be reviewed by USCIS. These RFRs, and the RFR associated with case number IZ-138422, will be prioritized by USCIS for review and adjudication ahead of others that are similarly situated. USCIS does not agree to prioritize any
6

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 13 of 41
subsequent RFR submitted by an individual after that individual has already submitted one RFR. 2. Good-Faith Processing. The Parties agree that State and USCIS will undertake the prioritized processing under this Settlement Agreement in good faith and Defendants will not retaliate against any individual because of this Settlement Agreement. 3. Any Admissions of Refugees. The Parties agree that this Settlement Agreement does not entitle any individual to admission, including any individual included in any of the Pending Cases. Any individual included in a Pending Case who is admitted to the United States as a result of the Settlement Agreement shall be admitted as a refugee and counted as part of the numerical limitation for admission of refugees set by Presidential Determination No. 2017-3 of September 29, 2017, 82 FR 49083 (Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2018).7 The resettlement agencies resettling the Pending Cases under the Settlement Agreement, including but not limited to those affiliated with organizational plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia, shall be paid for each Pending Case that is resettled as provided under, and to the extent required by, the cooperative agreements in place with the agencies as of the Effective Date. 4. Notice. Beginning ninety (90) days from the Effective Date, and every ninety (90) days thereafter until each individual included in a Pending Case is either admitted to the United States or is denied refugee resettlement, and any RFRs that have been filed within ninety (90) days of a denial pursuant to paragraph 1(h) above are adjudicated, State and USCIS shall provide Plaintiffs written notice that includes the following regarding the Pending Cases for each Part of Exhibit A: the number of cases and individuals admitted, the number of cases and individuals denied, and the number of cases and individuals remaining to be processed.
7 To the extent that any individual included in a Pending Case was admitted to the United States prior to the Effective Date, that individual will be counted as part of the numerical limitation for admission of refugees set by the Presidential Determination for the fiscal year in which the individual was admitted.
7

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 14 of 41
Decisions on any RFRs on cases covered by this settlement will also be included in the report. Within twenty-eight (28) days of the last case listed in Exhibit A either being admitted to the United States or denied, and the resolution of any RFRs that have been filed within ninety (90) days of a denial pursuant to paragraph 1(h) above, State and USCIS shall serve a notice to Plaintiffs’ counsel informing them that they have completed all consideration that Defendants agreed to perform herein (hereinafter referred to as “Notice of Completion”). At that point, Defendants will have satisfied their obligations under this Settlement Agreement.
5. Consideration by Plaintiffs. In consideration of the promises of Defendants set forth in this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs hereby release, waive, acquit, and forever discharge Defendants from, and are hereby forever barred and precluded from prosecuting, any and all claims, causes of action, or requests for any monetary, declaratory, and/or injunctive relief (whether in administrative or judicial proceedings), whether presently known or unknown, that have been or could have been asserted in the Case in which they are Plaintiffs by reason of, with respect to, in connection with, or which arise out of, any matters alleged in the Case in which they are Plaintiffs that the Plaintiffs in the Case have against the United States government, or any Defendants. For purposes of this Settlement Agreement, Sophonie Bizimana is considered a plaintiff in the Doe Case.
6. Waiver of Fees and Costs. The Parties and Parties’ Counsel release and forever discharge all claims against the other Party for monetary relief they have asserted or could have asserted in these Cases for attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses incurred to date and through the Effective Date, including but not limited to fees or expenses associated with this Settlement Agreement.
7. No Appeal or Review of Prior Orders. The Parties agree that they shall not seek appellate or mandamus review or reconsideration of any order entered in the Cases.
8. Enforcement. Contemporaneously with the execution of the Settlement Agreement by all Parties, Plaintiffs will file with the Court a Stipulated Dismissal of these Cases pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) in the form of Exhibit C. The Parties agree that upon
8

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 15 of 41
the basis of an alleged breach of this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs may file a Motion for Relief from a Judgment or Order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) with the Court seeking relief from the Court’s November 13, 2019 Orders of Dismissal (ECF No. 202 in civil docket number 17-0178 (W.D. Wash) and ECF No. 105 in civil docket number 17-1707 (W.D. Wash.)) and the Stipulated Dismissal, subject to the limitations prescribed below. The exclusive procedure to bring a claim to enforce the terms and conditions of this Settlement Agreement pursuant to this paragraph shall be as follows:
a. Prior to filing any motion pursuant to this Paragraph, counsel for Plaintiffs shall submit a written notice alleging a breach of this Settlement Agreement to counsel for Defendants. Such notice shall be submitted by first-class mail and electronic mail, and shall specify the basis for the alleged breach, including the case number(s) and refugee(s) as to which a breach is asserted, shall describe with particularity all of the facts and circumstances supporting such claim to the extent they are reasonably known to Plaintiffs, and shall state that Plaintiffs intend to seek relief from the Court through a motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) as set forth in Paragraph 8, supra. Plaintiffs shall not inform the Court of their allegation(s) at that time.
b. Plaintiffs may not file a Rule 60(b)(6) motion unless they have provided notice of any alleged breach by Defendants within sixty (60) calendar days of Plaintiffs receiving notice of, or becoming aware of, the alleged breach.
c. Defendants shall have a period of thirty (30) calendar days after the receipt of such notice described in Paragraph 8(a) to take appropriate action to resolve the alleged breach. The initiation of action to resolve an alleged breach may constitute such “appropriate action,” even if the action is not completed within the thirty (30) calendar day period. If requested to do so, Plaintiffs shall provide to Defendants any information and materials available to Plaintiffs that support the violation alleged in the notice.
9

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 16 of 41
d. If any assertion of breach by a Plaintiff is not resolved after consultation between the Parties’ counsel within the thirty (30) calendar day period set forth in Paragraph 8(c), or if prior to the expiration of such thirty (30) calendar day period, counsel for Defendants advise counsel for Plaintiffs that no further action will be taken by Defendants, Plaintiffs may seek relief from the Court as set forth in this Paragraph (Paragraph 8). Under no other circumstances may Plaintiffs seek such relief from the Court.
e. If Defendants are reasonably prevented from or delayed in performing any of the obligations set forth in Paragraph 1, supra, by the existence of extraordinary circumstances as designated in writing by Defendants with notice to Plaintiffs’ counsel, the period set forth in Paragraph 8(c) shall be extended for a reasonable time.
i. The extension set forth in Paragraph 8(e) shall be for a minimum of thirty (30) calendar days beyond the period set forth in Paragraph 8(c) without requiring action by any party other than Defendants, and may be longer than thirty (30) calendar days beyond that period pursuant to written agreement among the Parties.
ii. If, upon request by Defendants for an extension of the period set forth in Paragraph (c) by more than thirty (30) calendar days upon a designation of extraordinary circumstances, as set forth in Paragraph 8(e), Plaintiffs decline to agree to such extension, Defendants shall nonetheless be permitted to oppose the filing for a Motion for Relief from Judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6) as set forth in Paragraph 8, supra, upon the grounds of such extraordinary circumstances. f. Insofar as a motion asserted pursuant to this Paragraph is consistent with the requirements and limitations herein, Defendants hereby agree not to oppose the filing of such motion and to agree that a breach of the Settlement Agreement is sufficient to constitute a “reason that justifies relief” under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6). Other than
10

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 17 of 41
Defendants’ agreement that a breach of the Settlement Agreement is sufficient to constitute a “reason that justifies relief” under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(6), Defendants’ non-opposition to the filing of such motion shall not be deemed to waive any available defenses to the substance of such motion, including without limitation any right or authority to contend that no breach of this Settlement Agreement has occurred.
g. Plaintiffs’ right to seek relief pursuant to Paragraph 8 as to any and all assertions of breach of this Settlement Agreement shall be subject to the limitations period set forth in Paragraph 8(b), and any and all assertions of breach shall be forever waived if not asserted within the applicable limitations period.
h. Notwithstanding the limitation period set forth in Paragraph 8(b), Plaintiffs’ right to seek relief as to any assertion of breach of this Settlement Agreement pursuant to Paragraph 8 of this Settlement Agreement shall terminate sixty (60) calendar days after State and USCIS provide Plaintiffs the Notice of Completion under Paragraph 4. 9. No Admission of Liability. This Settlement Agreement is not and shall not be construed as an admission by Defendants of the truth of any allegation or the validity of any argument or claim asserted in the Cases, or of Defendants’ liability therein. Furthermore, the Parties shall not offer into evidence the terms of the Settlement Agreement in any civil, criminal or administrative action or proceeding other than proceedings that may be necessary to consummate or enforce this Settlement Agreement. 10. No Assignment. Plaintiffs represent and warrant that they are the sole and lawful owners of all right, title and interest in and to every claim and other matter which they purport to release herein, and that they have not heretofore assigned or transferred, or purported or attempted to assign or transfer to any person or entity any claims or other matters herein released. The Plaintiffs shall indemnify Defendants, and any of their departments, components and current or former employees, whether in their official or individual capacities, against, and defend and hold harmless from, any claims arising out of or relating to any such assignment or transfer of any claims or other matters released herein.
11

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 18 of 41
11. Entire Agreement. This Settlement Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties, and the Parties acknowledge and agree that no promise or representation not contained in this Settlement Agreement has been made to them, and they acknowledge and represent that this Settlement Agreement contains the entire understanding between the Parties, and contains all terms and conditions pertaining to the compromise and settlement of the disputes referenced herein. No statement, remark, agreement, or understanding, oral or written, that is not contained herein shall be recognized or enforced, nor does this Settlement Agreement reflect any agreed-upon purpose other than the desire of the Parties to reach a full and final conclusion of the Cases and to resolve the Cases without the time and expense of further litigation.
12. Rule of Construction. The Parties through their counsel have negotiated the terms of this Settlement Agreement. Any rule of construction providing that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Settlement Agreement. This Settlement Agreement shall be construed as if drafted by both Parties.
13. Collateral Use of Settlement Agreement Prohibited. The Parties have entered into this Settlement Agreement as a compromise measure to resolve all issues of controversy between them. The terms of this Settlement Agreement, its substance, the negotiations leading up to the Settlement Agreement, and the information exchanged by the Parties in the course of those negotiations may not be offered, taken, construed or introduced as evidence by the Parties for any purpose, either in the Cases or in any pending or subsequent proceeding of any nature, except that in any subsequent action involving the enforcement, construction, or application of this Settlement Agreement, a copy of the Settlement Agreement may be presented to verify its contents.
14. Headings. The headings in this Settlement Agreement are for the convenience of the Parties only and shall not limit, expand, modify, or aid in the interpretation or construction of this Settlement Agreement.
12

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 19 of 41
15. Amendments; Waivers. This Settlement Agreement cannot be modified or amended except by an instrument in writing, agreed to and signed by the Parties or their counsel, nor shall any provision hereof be waived other than by a written waiver, signed by the Parties or their counsel. Express waiver of any one provision shall not be deemed a waiver of any other provision.
16. Binding Nature of Settlement Agreement. This Settlement Agreement constitutes a final resolution of all claims brought by Plaintiffs in the Case in which they are Plaintiffs arising from acts allegedly taken against Plaintiffs in that Case by Defendants occurring prior to the Effective Date. This Settlement Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Plaintiffs and the Defendants and their respective heirs, executors, successors, assigns, entities, and personal representatives, including any person, entity, department, or agency succeeding to the interests or obligations of any party hereto, or having an interest herein.
17. Severability. The provisions of this Settlement Agreement shall be deemed severable, and any invalidity or unenforceability of any one or more of its provisions shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the other provisions herein.
18. Execution. This Settlement Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which together shall be deemed one and the same instrument. Facsimiles and electronic versions of signatures shall constitute acceptable, binding signatures for purposes of this Settlement Agreement.
19. Authorization. The Parties hereby warrant, represent, and guarantee that the person(s) executing this Settlement Agreement on their behalves are fully authorized to execute, deliver and perform this Settlement Agreement.
13

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 20 of 41

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 21 of 41

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 22 of 41

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 23 of 41
Exhibit A -- Summary

Each case is only counted once in the below numbers. Thus, if a case appears on multiple tabs, it will only be counted on the first tab on which it is included. The below displays the total number of cases on each tab excluding cases that have already appeared on an earlier tab.

Totals for Each Tab

Cases

Inds

Part 1

47

112

Part 2

56

60

Part 3

1

1

Part 4

19

23

Part 5

14

42

Part 6

6

18

Part 7

4

4

Part 8

20

55

Grand Total

167

315

Data extracted from the Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System (WRAPS). RPC/rpt_PRM/Litigation Reports/Litigation Exhibit A Parts 1-8 Report Run Date: 1/17/2020 9:39:47 AM

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 24 of 41

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 25 of 41
Exhibit A -- Lead Sheet
Part 1 FTJ and SAO cases designated Ready for Departure in WRAPS on October 23, 2017 7 FTJ cases (defined as Follow to Join cases) and 40 SAO cases (defined as Refugee cases) identified in Exhibit A-Part 1 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are the cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the cases that were designated Ready for Departure in State's Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System ('WRAPS') on October 23, 2017 Part 2 FTJ cases which were designated "pending completion granted" in CAMINO as of December 23, 2017 58 FTJ cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 2 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the cases that were designated 'pending completion granted' in USCIS's Case and Activity Management for International Operations ('CAM NO') database as of December 23, 2017 Part 3 FTJ cases which according to CAMINO, had a medical clearance expire between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018 2 FTJ cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 3 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the cases that, according to the USCIS CAM NO database, had a medical clearance expire between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018 Part 4 FTJ cases according to CAMINO, had a security clearance expire between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018 28 FTJ cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 4 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the cases that, according to the USCIS CAM NO database, had a security clearance expire between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018 Part 5 Cases previously selected by Plaintiffs from among those in the digital stamping queue in WRAPS between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018. 14 SAO cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 5 by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the thirty-two (32) cases previously selected by Plaintiffs from among those in the digital stamping queue in State’s WRAPS system between October 23, 2017 and February 1, 2018 Part 6 Cases of the Doe Case plaintiffs The 6 are the case numbers associated with Doe Case plaintiff Jeffrey Doe and Sophonie Bizimana
Part 7 Cases of JFS Case plaintiffs Doe The 7 cases listed in Exhibit A-Part 7 are the cases of JFS Case plaintiffs Doe 1, Doe 2, Doe 4, Doe 5, Doe 7, and Afkab Mohamed Hussein Part 8 Cases assured to 3 organizational plaintiffs - Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia on October 23, 2017 or January 31, 2018. The 22 cases identified in Exhibit A-Part 8, by case number and number of individuals who are included in each case. These cases are cases that remain pending as of January 17, 2020 of the thirty-three (33) cases that had an assurance to Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia on October 23, 2017 or January 31, 2018
Data extracted from the Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System (WRAPS). RPC/rpt_PRM/Litigation Reports/Litigation Exhibit A Parts 1-8 Report Run Date: 1/17/2020 9:39:47 AM

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 26 of 41

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 27 of 41

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 28 of 41

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 29 of 41

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 30 of 41

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 31 of 41

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 32 of 41

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 33 of 41

Filed Under Seal Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 34 of 41

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 35 of 41
Exhibit A -- Part 8

Part 8 Cases assured to 3 organizational plaintiffs - Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle, Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley, and the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia on October 23, 2017 or January 31, 2018.

Case Number ET-944193 KE-529632* KE-565736 KU-101009 KU-101010 KU-101029 KU-101030 KU-101031 R-118486 R-119806 R-121453 IZ-143071 IZ-303562* IZ-303623 JO-124030 JO-129361 JO-129362 KE-563457 TC-101056 TU-405215 TU-405216 TU-408124 Total Cases Total Inds

Case Size Plaintiff Name

1

Episcopal Diocese of Olympia

13

Episcopal Diocese of Olympia

4

Episcopal Diocese of Olympia

9

Episcopal Diocese of Olympia

1

Episcopal Diocese of Olympia

9

Episcopal Diocese of Olympia

1

Episcopal Diocese of Olympia

1

Episcopal Diocese of Olympia

1

Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley

1

Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley

1

Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley

5

Jewish Family Services of Silicon Valley

1

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

1

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

2

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

1

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

1

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

3

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

5

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

1

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

3

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

4

Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service of Seattle

22

69

Data extracted from the Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System (WRAPS). RPC/rpt_PRM/Litigation Reports/Litigation Exhibit A Parts 1-8 Report Run Date: 1/17/2020 9:39:47 AM

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 36 of 41

Exhibit B: Identities of Pseudonymous Plaintiffs

Doe et al. v. Trump et al., No. 17-0178 (W.D. Wash) (“Doe Case”)

Pseudonym

Real name

Joseph Doe

Joseph Doe

Jeffrey Doe

Jeffrey Doe

Jewish Family Service of Seattle et al. v. Trump et al., No. 17-1707 (W.D. Wash.)

Pseudonym

Real name

John Doe 1

Doe 1

John Doe 2

Doe 2

John Doe 3

Doe 3

Jane Doe 4

Doe 4

Jane Doe 5

Doe 5

Jane Doe 6

Doe 6

John Doe 7

Doe 7

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 37 of 41
Exhibit C

1

The Honorable James L. Robart

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10 JOHN DOE, et al.,

11

12

v.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

CASE NO. C17-0178JLR

Plaintiffs,

STIPULATED DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 41(A)(1)(A)(II)

13 DONALD TRUMP, et al.,

14

Defendants.

15 16 JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES, et al.,

CASE NO. C17-1707JLR

17

18

v.

Plaintiffs,

(RELATING TO BOTH CASES)

19 DONALD TRUMP, et al., 20 21

Defendants.

22

23

24

25

26

STIPULATED DISMISSAL (2:17-cv-00178-JLR)

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 38 of 41

1 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between all parties, through their
2 respective counsel, that the above-captioned actions are voluntarily dismissed, with prejudice,
3 against all Defendants, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Each party
4 shall bear its own fees and costs, and Plaintiffs may enforce the terms of the Settlement
5 Agreement entered into in this case (attached as Exhibit A) as described therein.
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

STIPULATED DISMISSAL - 1 Case No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 39 of 41

1 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY:

2 s/ Lauren Watts Staniar

3

David Burman, WSBA No. 10611 Lauren Watts Staniar, WSBA No. 48741

4 Tyler Roberts, WSBA No. 52688 Perkins Coie LLP

5 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900

Seattle, WA 98101-3099 6 Telephone: 206.359.8000

7

Facsimile: 206.359.9000 dburman@perkinscoie.com

8 lstaniar@perkinscoie.com troberts@perkinscoie.com
9

Max S. Wolson, Pro Hac Vice 10 National Immigration Law Center

11 3450 Wilshire Blvd, #108-62 Los Angeles, CA 90010

12 Tel: (213) 639-3900 Fax: (213) 639-3911
13 wolson@nilc.org

14 Lauren E. Aguiar, Pro Hac Vice

15 Mollie M. Kornreich, Pro Hac Vice Abigail E. Davis, Pro Hac Vice

16 Four Times Square

New York, NY 10036 17 Tel: (212) 735-3000

18

Fax: (212) 735-2000 lauren.aguiar@probonolaw.com

19 mollie.kornreich@probonolaw.com abigail.sheehan@probonolaw.com

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DATED this __th day of February, 2020
s/ Mariko Hirose Mariko Hirose, Pro Hac Vice Deepa Alagesan, Pro Hac Vice Linda Evarts, Pro Hac Vice Kathryn C. Meyer, Pro Hac Vice International Refugee Assistance Project 40 Rector Street, 9th Floor New York, NY 10006 Tel: (646) 459-3044 mhirose@refugeerights.org dalagesan@refugeerights.org levarts@refugeerights.org kmeyer@refugeerights.org
Justin B. Cox, Pro Hac Vice International Refugee Assistance Project PO Box 170208 Atlanta, GA 30317 Tel: (678) 279-5441 jcox@refugeerights.org
Melissa S. Keaney, Pro Hac Vice International Refugee Assistance Project PO Box 2291 Fair Oaks, CA 95628 Tel: (916) 546-6125 mkeaney@refugeerights.org
Elizabeth Sweet, Pro Hac Vice Mark Hetfield, Pro Hac Vice HIAS, Inc. 1300 Spring Street, Suite 500 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Tel: 301-844-7300 liz.sweet@hias.org mark.hetfield@hias.org
Counsel for Plaintiffs Jewish Family Service, et al.

STIPULATED DISMISSAL - 2 Case No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 40 of 41

1

2 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION 3 OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION

4 By: /s/ Lisa Nowlin Lisa Nowlin, WSBA # 51512

5

P.O. Box 2728

Seattle, WA 98111

6

Tel.: (206) 624-2184

7

Email: lnowlin@aclu-wa.org

8

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
By: /s/ Lynn Lincoln Sarko By: /s/ Tana Lin By: /s/ Derek W. Loeser By: /s/ Alison S. Gaffney
Lynn Lincoln Sarko, WSBA # 16569 Tana Lin, WSBA # 35271 Derek W. Loeser, WSBA # 24274 Alison S. Gaffney, WSBA # 45565 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101 Tel.: (206) 623-1900 Fax: (206) 623-3384 Email: lsarko@kellerrohrback.com
tlin@kellerrohrback.com dloeser@kellerrohrback.com agaffney@kellerrohrback.com
By: /s/ Laurie B. Ashton Laurie B. Ashton (admitted pro hac vice) 3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400 Phoenix, AZ 85012-2600 Tel.: (602) 248-0088 Fax: (602) 248-2822 Email: lashton@kellerrohrback.com
By: /s/ Alison Chase Alison Chase (admitted pro hac vice) 1129 State Street, Suite 8 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Tel.: (805) 456-1496 Fax: (805) 456-1497 Email: achase@kellerrohrback.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Cooperating Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington Foundation

STIPULATED DISMISSAL - 3 Case No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000

Case 2:17-cv-00178-JLR Document 205 Filed 02/10/20 Page 41 of 41

1 JOSEPH H. HUNT
2 Assistant Attorney General
3 AUGUST E. FLENTJE 4 Special Counsel

5 JENNIFER D. RICKETTS Director, Federal Programs Branch
6

7

JOSHUA E. GARDNER Special Counsel, Federal Programs Branch

8

9 /s/ Joshua Kolsky______________ JOSHUA KOLSKY
10 KEVIN SNELL 11 Trial Attorneys
U.S. Department of Justice 12 Civil Division, Federal Programs Branch
1100 L Street, NW 13 Washington, DC 20005
Tel: (202) 305-7664 14 Fax: (202) 616-8470 15 Email: joshua.kolsky@usdoj.gov

16 Counsel for Defendants

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

STIPULATED DISMISSAL - 4 Case No. 2:17-cv-00178-JLR

Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Fax: 206.359.9000