Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:1

1 Carmen Iguina (CA SBN #277369)

2 Jennifer Pasquarella (CA SBN #263241) Ahilan Arulanantham (CA SBN# 237841)

3 Peter Bibring (CA SBN #223981)

4

ACLU of Southern California 1313 West 8th Street

5 Los Angeles, CA 90017

6 Telephone: (213) 977-9500 Facsimile: (213) 977-5297

7 Email: ciguina@aclusocal.org

8
Stacy Tolchin (CA SBN #217431) 9 Megan Brewer (CA SBN#268248)
10 Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin 634 S. Spring St., Suite 500A
11 Los Angeles, CA 90014
12 Telephone: (213) 622-7450 Facsimile: (213) 622-7233
13 Email: Stacy@Tolchinimmigration.com
14 Email: Megan@Tolchinimmigration.com

15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

16

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17 Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan,

Case No.

18
Petitioner,

19

v.

20 John F. Kelly; Secretary, Department of Homeland Security; DONALD TRUMP,

21 President of the United States; U.S.

22 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (“DHS”); U.S. CUSTOMS AND

23 BORDER PROTECTION (“CBP”); JOHN

24 KELLY, Secretary of DHS; KEVIN K. MCALEENAN, Acting Commissioner of

25 CBP; and MITCHELL MERRIAM, Los

26 Angeles Field Director, CBP,

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

27

Respondents.

28

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 2 of 10 Page ID #:2

1
INTRODUCTION
2
Petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan, is an Iranian citizen who has a U.S.
3
Visa, landed at Los Angeles International Airport (“LAX Airport”) on the evening
4
of January 27, 2017. The U.S. government granted Petitioner Vayeghan an
5
immigrant visa on October 27, 2016 as a result of a petition filed by his U.S. citizen
6
son.
7

8

Despite these findings and Petitioner’s valid entry documents, U.S. Customs

9 and Border Protection (“CBP”) blocked Petitioner from exiting Los Angeles

10 International (“LAX”) Airport and detained Petitioner therein. No magistrate has

11 determined that there is sufficient justification for the continued detention of

12 Petitioner. Instead, CBP is holding Petitioner at LAX Airport and threatening to

13 deport him back to Iran today at 3:00 p.m. solely pursuant to an executive order

14 issued on January 27, 2017.

15

Because the executive order is unlawful as applied to Petitioner, his

16 continued detention based solely on the executive order violates his Fifth

17 Amendment procedural and substantive due process rights, violates the First

18 Amendment Establishment Clause, is ultra vires the immigration statutes, and

19 violates the Administrative Procedure Act and Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

20 Further, Petitioner continued unlawful detention is part of a widespread pattern

21 applied to many refugees and arriving aliens detained after the issuance of the

22 January 27, 2017 executive order. Therefore, Petitioner respectfully applies to this

23 Court for a writ of habeas corpus to remedy his unlawful detention by Respondents,

24 and for declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent such harms from recurring.

25
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
26
1.   Jurisdiction is conferred on this court by 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1361,
27
2241, 2243, and the Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
28

0
  

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 3 of 10 Page ID #:3

1
This court has further remedial authority pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act,

2
28 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq.

3

2.   Venue properly lies within the Central District of California because a

4
substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to this action occurred in the

5
District. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

6

3.   No petition for habeas corpus has previously been filed in any court to

7
review Petitioner’s cases.

8

PARTIES
9

10

4.   Petitioner Khoshbakthi Vayeghan is an Iranian citizen with an

11 approved U.S. visa issued on October 27, 2016 on the basis of a petition filed by

12 his U.S. citizen son. He currently being detained at LAX Airport and threatened

13 with deportation to Iran on January 28, 2017 at 3:00 p.m. Petitioner is Muslim.

14

5.   The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) is a cabinet

15 department of the United States federal government with the primary mission of

16 securing the United States.

17

6.   U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) is an agency within

18 DHS with the primary mission of detecting and preventing the unlawful entry of

19 persons and goods into the United States.

20

7.   Respondent John Kelly is the Secretary of DHS. Secretary Kelly has

21 immediate custody of Petitioner. He is sued in his official capacity.

22

8.   Respondent Kevin K. McAleenan is the Acting Commissioner of CBP.

23 Acting Commissioner McAleenan has immediate custody of Petitioner. He is sued

24 in his official capacity.

25

9.   Respondent Mitchell Merriam is the Director of the Los Angeles Field

26 Office of CBP, which has immediate custody of Petitioner. He is sued in his official

27 capacity.

28

1
  

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 4 of 10 Page ID #:4

1

10.   Respondent Donald Trump is the President of the United States. He is

2
sued in his official capacity.

3

STATEMENT OF FACTS
4

5 President Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order

6

11.   On January 20, 2017, Donald Trump was inaugurated as the forty-fifth

7 President of the United States.

8

12.   One week later, on January 27, President Trump signed an executive

9 order entitled, “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United

10 States,” which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is hereinafter referred to as the

11 “EO.”

12

13.   Citing the threat of terrorism committed by foreign nationals, the EO

13 directs a variety of changes to the manner and extent to which non-citizens may

14 seek and obtain admission to the United States, particularly (although not

15 exclusively) as refugees. Among other things, the EO imposes a 120-day

16 moratorium on the refugee resettlement program as a whole; proclaims that “that

17 the entry of nationals of Syria as refugees is detrimental to the interests of the

18 United States,” and therefore “suspend[s]” indefinitely their entry to the country;

19 similarly proclaims that “the entry of more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal year 2017

20 would be detrimental to the interests” of the country.

21

14.   Most relevant to the instant action is Section 3(c) of the EO, in which

22 President Trump proclaims “that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the

23 United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA,

24 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States,”

25 and that he is therefore “suspend[ing] entry into the United States, as immigrants

26 and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order,” with

27 narrow exceptions not relevant here.

28

2
  

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 5 of 10 Page ID #:5

1

15.   There are seven countries that fit the criteria in 8 U.S.C. § 1187(a)(12):

2
Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. According to the terms of the

3
EO, therefore, the “entry into the United States” of non-citizens from those

4
countries is “suspended” from 90 days from the date of the EO.

5

Petitioner Vayeghan
6

7

16.   Petitioner Khoshbakthi Vayeghan is an Iranian citizen with an

8 approved U.S. visa issued on October 27, 2016 on the basis of a petition filed by

9 his U.S. citizen son, who lives in Indiana. The visa is set to expire on February 14,

10 2017. Based on this visa, Petitioner Khoshbakthi Vayeghan would be eligible to

11 adjust to legal permanent resident status upon his admission to the United States.

12

17.   Had he been afforded admission, several weeks after entering the

13 United States, Petitioner would have received a green card in the mail and could

14 naturalize five years later.

15

18.   After selling his business and assets in Iran in anticipation of

16 immigrating to the United States to join his son, Petitioner travelled to the United

17 States. He departed on flight from Dubai and arrived at LAX Airport at

18 approximately 7:15 p.m. on January 27, 2017.

19

19.   Upon arrival at LAX Airport, CBP officers detained Petitioner

20 Khoshbakthi Vayeghan. His brother and sister-in-law, who live in Los Angeles,

21 have been informed that Petitioner Khoshbakthi Vayeghan will be deported back to

22 Iran on a flight leaving LAX Airport on January 28, 2017 at approximately 3:00

23 p.m.

24

20.   Petitioner is not being permitted to meet with his attorneys who are

25 present at LAX Airport and have made multiple attempts to meet with him. After

26 requesting on multiple occasions to meet with Petitioner, attorneys have been

27 informed that access to Petitioner is denied on the basis of 8 C.F.R. § 292.1.

28

3
  

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 6 of 10 Page ID #:6

1

21.   Upon knowledge and belief, Petitioner remains in the custody of CBP

2
at LAX Airport.

3

CAUSES OF ACTION
4

5

COUNT ONE FIRST AMENDMENT – ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE

6

1.   Petitioner repeats and incorporate by reference each and every

7 allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

8

2.   The EO exhibits hostility to a specific religious faith, Islam, and gives

9 preference to other religious faiths, principally Christianity. The EO therefore

10 violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by not pursuing a course

11 of neutrality with regard to different religious faiths.

12

3.   Petitioner is harmed by the EO’s disfavoring of his religion, Islam, and

13 the discriminatory denial of admission to the United States pursuant to the EO.

14

COUNT TWO

15

FIFTH AMENDMENT – EQUAL PROTECTION

4.   Petitioner repeats and incorporates by reference each and every
16

allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.
17

5.   The EO discriminates against Petitioner on the basis of his country of
18

origin and religion, without sufficient justification, and therefore violates the equal
19

protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
20

6.   Additionally, the EO was substantially motivated by animus toward—
21

and has a disparate effect on—Muslims, which also violates the equal protection
22

component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Jana-Rock Const.,
23

Inc. v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Econ. Dev., 438 F.3d 195, 204 (2d Cir. 2006); Hunter v.
24

Underwood, 471 U.S. 222 (1985).
25

7.   Respondents have demonstrated an intent to discriminate against
26

Petitioner on the basis of religion through repeated public statements that make
27

clear the EO was designed to prohibit the entry of Muslims to the United States.
28

4
  

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 7 of 10 Page ID #:7

1
See Michael D. Shear & Helene Cooper, Trump Bars Refugees and Citizens of 7

2
Muslim Countries, N.Y. Times (Jan. 27, 2017), (“[President Trump] ordered that

3
Christians and others from minority religions be granted priority over Muslims.”);

4
Carol Morello, Trump Signs Order Temporarily Halting Admission of Refugees,

5
Promises Priority for Christians, Wash. Post (Jan. 27, 2017).

6

8.   Applying a general law in a fashion that discriminate on the basis of

7
religion in this way violates Petitioner’s rights to equal protection the Fifth

8
Amendment Due Process Clause. Hayden v. County of Nassau, 180 F.3d 42, 48 (2d

9
Cir. 1999); Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 373-74 (1886). Petitioner satisfies

10
the Supreme Court’s test to determine whether a facially neutral law – in the case,

11
the EO and federal immigration law – has been applied in a discriminatory fashion.

12
The Supreme Court requires an individual bringing suit to challenge the application

13
of a law bear the burden of demonstrating a “prima facie case of discriminatory

14
purpose.”Vill. of Arlington Heights v. Metro. Hous. Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 266-

15
7 (1977). This test examines the impact of the official action, whether there has

16
been a clear pattern unexplainable on other grounds besides discrimination, the

17
historical background of the decision, the specific sequence of events leading up to

18
the challenged decision, and departures from the normal procedural sequence. Id.

19

9.   Here, President Donald Trump and senior staff have made clear that

20
EO will be applied to primarily exclude individuals on the basis of their national

21
origin and religion. See, e.g., sources cited, supra. See, e.g., Donald J. Trump,

22
Donald J. Trump Statement On Preventing Muslim Immigration, (Dec. 7, 2015),

23
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-

24
preventing-muslim-immigration (“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and

25
complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's

26
representatives can figure out what is going on.”); Abby Phillip and Abigail

27
Hauslohner, Trump on the Future of Proposed Muslim Ban, Registry: ‘You know

28

5
  

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 8 of 10 Page ID #:8

1
my plans’, Wash. Post (Dec. 22, 2016). Further, the President has promised that

2
preferential treatment will be given to Christians, unequivocally demonstrating the

3
special preferences and discriminatory impact that the EO has upon Petitioner. See

4
supra.

5

10.   Thus, Respondents have applied the EO with forbidden animus and

6
discriminatory intent in violation of the equal protection of the Fifth Amendment

7
and violated Petitioner’s equal protection rights.

8

COUNT THREE

9

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT

10

11.   Petitioner repeats and incorporates by reference each and every

11 allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

12

12.   Respondents detained and mistreated Petitioner solely pursuant to an

13 executive order issued on January 27, 2017, which expressly discriminates against

14 Petitioner on the basis of their country of origin and was substantially motivated by

15 animus toward Muslims. See supra Count Five.

16

13.   The EO exhibits hostility to a specific religious faith, Islam, and gives

17 preference to other religious faiths, principally Christianity.

18

14.   The INA forbids discrimination in issuance of visas based on a

19 person’s race, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence. 8 U.S.C. §

20 1152(a)(1)(A).

21

15.   Respondents’ actions in detaining and mistreating Petitioner were

22 arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with

23 law, in violation of APA § 706(2)(A); contrary to constitutional right, power,

24 privilege, or immunity, in violation of APA § 706(2)(B); in excess of statutory

25 jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right, in violation of APA

26 § 706(2)(C); and without observance of procedure required by law, in violation of §

27 706(2)(D).

28

6
  

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 9 of 10 Page ID #:9

1

COUNT FOUR

2

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT

3

16.   Petitioner repeats and incorporates by reference each and every

4 allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

5

17.   The EO will have the effect of imposing a special disability on the

6 basis of religious views or religious status, by withdrawing an important

7 immigration benefit principally from Muslims on account of their religion. In doing

8 so, the EO places a substantial burden on Petitioner’s exercise of religion in a way

9 that is not the least restrictive means of furthering a compelling governmental

10 interest.

11

COUNT FIVE

THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, 8 U.S.C. § 1152

12

18.   Petitioner repeats and incorporates by reference each and every

13
allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

14

19.   The EO discriminates against Petitioner on the basis of his nationality,

15
without sufficient justification, and therefore violates 8 U.S.C. § 1152.

16

COUNT SIX

17

THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT, 8 U.S.C. § 1151

18

1.   Petitioner repeats and incorporates by reference each and every

19 allegation contained in the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth herein.

20

2.   Petitioner has a valid U.S. visa and approved legal permanent resident

21 status, and denial of admission into the United States violates 8 U.S.C. § 1151.

22

23

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

24 WHEREFORE, Petitioner pray that this Court grant the following relief:
25
(1) Issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus requiring Respondents to release
26
Petitioner;
27

28

7
  

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 1 Filed 01/28/17 Page 10 of 10 Page ID #:10

1
(2) Enter a judgment declaring that Respondents’ detention of Petitioner is
2
unauthorized by statute and contrary to law;
3
(3) Issue an Order requiring Petitioner’s admission to the United States
4
per the terms of the Immigration and Nationality Act;
5

6

(4) Award Petitioner reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees; and

7

(5) Grant any other and further relief that this Court may deem fit and

8

proper.

9

10
DATED: January 28, 2017
11
Los Angeles, California
12

13
Respectfully submitted,
14

15
/s/ Carmen Iguina
16
CARMEN IGUINA
17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

8
  

 
 Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 6 Filed 01/29/17 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:55

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

11 ALI KHOSHBAKHTI VAYEGHAN,

12

Petitioner,

13

v.

14

15

JOHN F. KELLY, Department of Homeland Security, et al.,

16 Respondents.
17

)) Case No. CV 17-0702 ) ) TEMPORARY RESTRAINING )) OCORDRERREC[ATMEDE]NDED and ) ) ) ) ) ) )

18

On January 28, 2017, Petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan filed a Petition for

19 Writ of Habeas Corpus and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, a proposed 20 Order to Show Cause re Preliminary Injunction, and an Ex Parte Application for 21 Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) staying his removal from the United States, and 22 23 ordering his release from the custody of the Department of Homeland Security. [Doc. ## 24 1, 2.] Before the Court could rule on the TRO, he was placed on a flight to Dubai to be 25 removed to Iran. On January 29, 2017, he filed an Amended Ex Parte Application for

26 Temporary Restraining Order (“Amended TRO Application”), which is currently before

27 the Court. [Doc. # 4.]

28

-1-

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 6 Filed 01/29/17 Page 2 of 4 Page ID #:56

1

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 governs the issuance of TROs and preliminary

2 injunctions, and courts apply the same standard to both. See Credit Bureau Connection,

3 Inc. v. Pardini, __ F. Supp. 2d __, 2010 WL 2737128, at *5 (E.D. Cal. July 12, 2010)

4 (citing Ne. Ohio Coal. for the Homeless & Serv. Employees Int’l Union, Local 1199 v.

5 Blackwell, 467 F.3d 999, 1009 (6th Cir. 2006)). The purpose of such injunctive relief is

6 to preserve the rights and relative positions of the parties, i.e., the status quo, until a final
7 judgment issues. See U.S. Philips Corp. v. KBC Bank N.V., 590 F.3d 1091, 1094 (9th 8 Cir. 2010) (citing Univ. of Tex. v. Camenisch, 451 U.S. 390, 395, 101 S.Ct. 1830, 68 9 L.Ed.2d 175 (1981)). 10

11

Having reviewed and considered Petitioner’s written submissions, the Court finds

12 that:

13

1. Petitioner has demonstrated a strong likelihood of success in establishing that

14

15

removal violates the Establishment Clause, the Immigration and Nationality Act,

16

and his rights to Equal Protection guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

17

See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1151, 1152(a)(1)(A) (“[N]o person shall receive any preference or

18

priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of

19

the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.”); cf. Board

20

of Educ. Of Kiryas Joel Vill. Sch. Dist. v. Grumet, 512 U.S. 687, 696, 702–703

21

(1994).

22

23 2. There is a strong likelihood that Petitioner is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the

24

absence of interim injunctive relief.

25

26 3. The balance of equities weighs sharply in favor of Petitioner and granting interim

27

injunctive relief.

28

-2-

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 6 Filed 01/29/17 Page 3 of 4 Page ID #:57

1 4. The Court must consider the public interest in upholding constitutional rights.

2

Preminger v. Pincipi, 422 F.3d 815, 826 (9th Cir. 2005). Given the constitutional

3

rights at issue in this case, interim injunctive relief is in the public interest.

4

5

In light of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

6

7 1. The Amended TRO Application is GRANTED. Respondents and their officers,

8

agents, employees, attorneys, and all persons acting in concert or participating with

9

them, are enjoined and restrained from barring Petitioner’s return to the United

10

States.

11

12

2. Respondents shall transport Petitioner back to the United States and admit him

13

under the terms of his previously approved visa.

14

15

16

3. Respondents shall communicate the terms of this Court’s order immediately to

17

officers in Dubai, and to authorities in the airport in Dubai holding Petitioner on

18

Respondents’ orders.

19

20 4. Unless otherwise agreed upon by the assigned judge and/or the parties, Petitioner

21

shall file any supplemental brief in support of his motion for preliminary injunction

22

by January 31, 2017. Respondents shall file their opposition to Petitioner’s Ex

23

Parte Application and motion for preliminary injunction by February 3, 2017.

24

Petitioner shall file his reply by February 7, 2017.

25

26

27

28

-3-

Case 2:17-cv-00702 Document 6 Filed 01/29/17 Page 4 of 4 Page ID #:58

1 5. Respondents shall appear before the assigned judge on February 10, 2017 at 9:30

2

a.m. to show cause why the preliminary injunctive relief sought in the Amended Ex

3

Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause re

4

Preliminary Injunction should not be granted.

5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED.

7

8

9 DATED: January 29, 2017 10 11

DOLLY M. GEE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

-4-

 
 Case 2:17-cv-00702-SJO-GJS Document 32 Filed 06/27/17 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:218

1 Jennifer Pasquarella (CA SBN #263241)
2 Ahilan Arulanantham (CA SBN# 237841) Peter Bibring (CA SBN #223981)
3 ACLU of Southern California 4 1313 West 8th Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017 5 Telephone: (213) 977-9500
6 Facsimile: (213) 977-5297 Email: pbibring@aclusocal.org
7
8 Stacy Tolchin (CA SBN #217431) Megan Brewer (CA SBN#268248)
9 Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin
10 634 S. Spring St., Suite 500A Los Angeles, CA 90014
11 Telephone: (213) 622-7450
12 Facsimile: (213) 622-7233 Email: Stacy@Tolchinimmigration.com
13 Email: Megan@Tolchinimmigration.com

JS-6
June 27, 2017
VPC

14 Attorneys for the Petitioner

15

16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

17

18

ALI KHOSHBAKHTI 19 VAYEGHAN,

20

Petitioner,

21 vs.

22

JOHN F. KELLY, et al.,

23

Respondents.

24

25

) Case no. 2:17-cv-00702
) )
) ORDER RE STIPULATED ) DISMISSAL ) WITH PREJUDICE
) ) ) ) ) )

26

27

28

Case 2:17-cv-00702-SJO-GJS Document 32 Filed 06/27/17 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:219

1

The Court is in receipt of the STIPULATION to Dismiss Case pursuant to

2 F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) filed by Plaintiffs, indicating that the parties have entered

3 into a settlement agreement and have stipulated to dismissing Plaintiff’s claims

4 with prejudice pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Accordingly, the Court Orders

5 that this matter shall be dismissed with prejudice.

6

7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

9
Dated: June 27, 2017
10
11

________________________________ HON. S. JAMES OTERO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 
 Case: 2:17-cv-702 As of: 07/01/2017 09:15 AM PDT 1 of 5
ACCO,TRO,(GJSx),CLOSED,DISCOVERY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Western Division − Los Angeles)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:17−cv−00702−SJO−GJS

Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan v. John F. Kelly, et al. Assigned to: Judge S. James Otero Referred to: Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish Related Cases: 2:17−cv−00706−SJO−GJS
2:17−cv−00786−SJO−GJS Cause: 28:1651 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Petitioner

Date Filed: 01/28/2017 Date Terminated: 06/27/2017 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 463 Habeas Corpus − Alien Detainee Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Defendant

Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan

represented by Ahilan T Arulanantham ACLU Foundation of Southern California 1313 West Eighth Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 213−977−9500 Fax: 213−977−5299 Email: aarulanantham@aclu−sc.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Carmen Iguina 2845 Hollister Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90032 6176946590 Fax: 6176946590 Email: carmen.iguina@nyu.edu TERMINATED: 05/18/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennifer L Pasquarella ACLU Foundation of Southern California 1313 West Eight Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 213−977−9500 Fax: 213−977−5297 Email: jpasquarella@aclu−sc.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Megan A Brewer Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin 634 South Spring Street Suite 500A Los Angeles, CA 90014 213−622−7450 Fax: 213−622−7233 Email: megan@tolchinimmigration.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stacy Eva Tolchin Law Offices of Stacy Tolchin 634 South Spring Street Suite 500A Los Angeles, CA 90014 213−622−7450 Fax: 213−622−7233 Email: Stacy@tolchinimmigration.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Peter Bibring ACLU Foundation of Southern California 1313 West Eight Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 213−977−9500

Case: 2:17-cv-702 As of: 07/01/2017 09:15 AM PDT 2 of 5
Fax: 213−977−5299 Email: pbibring@aclu−sc.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant John F. Kelly Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
Defendant Donald Trump President of the United States
Defendant U.S. Department of Homeland Security DHS
Defendant U.S. Customs and Border Protection CBP
Defendant John Kelly Secretary of DHS
Defendant Kevin K. Mcaleenan Acting commissioner of CBP
Defendant Mitchell Merriam Los Angeles Director, CBP

represented by Brian Christopher Ward US Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation − Civil Division PO Box 868 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044−0868 202−616−9121 Fax: 202−305−7000 Email: brian.c.ward@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Brian Christopher Ward (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Brian Christopher Ward (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Brian Christopher Ward (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Brian Christopher Ward (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Brian Christopher Ward (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Brian Christopher Ward (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 01/28/2017

# Docket Text
1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (28 USC 2241), Receipt No. 0973−19268510 for $5 filing fee, filed by Plaintiff Ali Khoshbakhti

Case: 2:17-cv-702 As of: 07/01/2017 09:15 AM PDT 3 of 5

01/28/2017
01/29/2017 01/29/2017
01/29/2017 01/29/2017
01/30/2017
01/30/2017 01/30/2017 01/30/2017
01/30/2017 01/30/2017 01/31/2017 01/31/2017 02/01/2017

Vayeghan. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Attorney Carmen G Iguina added to party Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan(pty:pet))(Iguina, Carmen) (Entered: 01/28/2017)
2 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Temporary Restraining Order as to Staying of Petitioner's Removal from the United Sates filed by Petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. Ex Parte Application set for hearing on 1/28/2017 at 05:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Paul L. Abrams. (Attachments: # 1 Points & Authorities, # 2 Declaration Iguina Declaration, # 3 Proposed Order Order to Show Cause) (Iguina, Carmen) (Entered: 01/28/2017)
3 NOTICE of Appearance (Ward, Brian) (Entered: 01/29/2017)
4 PETITION AMENDED APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER with filing fee previously paid (5.00 paid on 01/28/2017,, filed by plaintiffs Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration in support of Petitioner's Amended Temporary Restraining Order, # 2 Proposed Order to Show Cause) (Attorney Peter Bibring added to party Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan(pty:pet))(Bibring, Peter) (Entered: 01/29/2017)
5 ORDER by Judge Dolly M. Gee: granting 2 EX PARTE APPLICATION for TRO (kr) (Entered: 01/29/2017)
6 TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER [AMENDED and CORRECTED] by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Amended TRO Application is GRANTED. Respondents and their officers, agents, employees, attorneys, and all persons acting in concert or participating with them, are enjoined and restrained from barring Petitioners return to the United States. Respondents shall transport Petitioner back to the United States and admit him under the terms of his previously approved visa. Respondents shall communicate the terms of this Courts order immediately to officers in Dubai, and to authorities in the airport in Dubai holding Petitioner on Respondents orders. (see order for complete details.) (kd) (Entered: 01/29/2017)
7 NOTICE OF REFERENCE to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable District Judge S. James Otero and referred to Magistrate Judge Steve Kim, who is authorized to consider preliminary matters and conduct all further hearings as may be appropriate or necessary. Pursuant to Local Rule 83−2.4, the Court must be notified within five (5) days of any address change. See notice for additional details. (jtil) (Entered: 01/30/2017)
8 INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge S. James Otero. (vcr) (Entered: 01/30/2017)
9 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. (Iguina, Carmen) (Entered: 01/30/2017)
10 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Petitioner All Plaintiffs, identifying ALI KHOSHBAKHTI VAYEGHAN JOHN F. KELLY, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION KEVIN K. MCALEENAN, Acting Commissioner of CBP MITCHELL MERRIAM, Los Angeles Field Director, CBP. (Bibring, Peter) (Entered: 01/30/2017)
11 NOTICE of Errata and Corrected Proof of Service filed by petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. (Bibring, Peter) (Entered: 01/30/2017)
12 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 1 filed by petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. (Bibring, Peter) (Entered: 01/30/2017)
13 STIPULATION to Continue TRO Briefing and Hearing filed by petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order re TRO Briefing and Hearing)(Bibring, Peter) (Entered: 01/31/2017)
14 60 DAY Summons Issued, In re: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 1 as to all Defendants. (mkr) (Entered: 01/31/2017)
15 ORDER RE TRO BRIEFING AND HEARING 13 by Judge S. James Otero; 1. The briefing schedule set forth in the Temporary Restraining Order [Amended and

Case: 2:17-cv-702 As of: 07/01/2017 09:15 AM PDT 4 of 5

02/03/2017 02/09/2017 02/10/2017 02/17/2017
02/17/2017 03/03/2017 03/03/2017 03/17/2017 03/24/2017
04/24/2017
05/04/2017

Corrected], Dkt. No. 6 (TRO) at 3 (filed January 29, 2017), is stayed until further notice of this Court; 2. The hearing presently set in the TRO for February 10, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. is vacated; 3. In lieu of the TRO hearing, the Court will set an in−person status conference for February 10, 2017 at 9:30 a.m., to discuss the status of the compliance. In the event Mr. Vayeghan is admitted to the United States pursuant to the terms of the TRO, and the Plaintiffs determine they need no further action on the TRO, the Court directs them to file a notice withdrawing their motion before that date. (lc) (Entered: 02/01/2017)
16 ORDER TRANSFERRING CIVIL ACTION pursuant to General Order 05−07. ORDER case transferred from Magistrate Judge Steve Kim to the calendar of Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish for Discovery. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:17−cv−00702 SJO (GJSx). Signed by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish and Magistrate Judge Steve Kim. (esa) (Entered: 02/03/2017)
17 STATUS REPORT filed by Petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. (Bibring, Peter) (Entered: 02/09/2017)
24 MINUTES OF Status Conference held before Judge S. James Otero: Court and counsel confer whether the Court should dissolve the TRO or dismiss it as moot.The Court dissolve the TRO and sets a Status Conference on 3/10/17 9:00 a.m. The parties shall file a joint status report by 3/3/17. Court Reporter: Carol Zurberg. (lc) Modified on 3/30/2017 (lc). (Entered: 03/30/2017)
18 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 2/10/17 10:07 a.m. Court Reporter: Carol Jean Zurborg, phone number (213) 894−3539. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 3/10/2017. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 3/20/2017. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 5/18/2017. (Zurborg, Carol) (Entered: 02/17/2017)
19 NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 2/10/17 10:07 a.m. re Transcript 18 THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (Zurborg, Carol) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 02/17/2017)
20 STATUS REPORT AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE filed by Defendants John F. Kelly, John Kelly, Kevin K. Mcaleenan, Mitchell Merriam, Donald Trump, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Ward, Brian) (Entered: 03/03/2017)
21 ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE 20 by Judge S. James Otero:: The status conference currently set for March 10, 2017, is vacated. A status conference is set for March 24, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. The Parties will submit a joint status report on March 17, 2017. (lc) (Entered: 03/03/2017)
22 STATUS REPORT filed by Defendants John F. Kelly, John Kelly, Kevin K. Mcaleenan, Mitchell Merriam, Donald Trump, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (Ward, Brian) (Entered: 03/17/2017)
23 MINUTES OF Status Conference held before Judge S. James Otero: Court and counsel discuss the status of the case. The Court sets the following schedule:Governments Motion to Dismiss due − April 24, 2017; Plaintiffs Opposition due − May 8, 2017; Governments Reply due− May 15, 2017; Hearing on Motion to Dismiss − June 5, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. Court Reporter: Carol Zurberg. (lc) (Entered: 03/27/2017)
25 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Respondents John F. Kelly, John Kelly, Kevin K. Mcaleenan, Mitchell Merriam, Donald Trump, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Motion set for hearing on 6/5/2017 at 10:00 AM before Judge S. James Otero. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Proposed Order) (Ward, Brian) (Entered: 04/24/2017)
26 STIPULATION to Vacate Hearing on Motion to Dismiss and Briefing Schedule NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case 25 , Status Conference, 23

Case: 2:17-cv-702 As of: 07/01/2017 09:15 AM PDT 5 of 5

05/08/2017 05/18/2017 06/06/2017
06/26/2017 06/26/2017 06/27/2017

filed by Petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Bibring, Peter) (Entered: 05/04/2017)
27 ORDER UPON JOINT STATUS REPORT AND STIPULATION 26 by Judge S. James Otero : 1. The briefing schedule set at the status conference on March 24, 2017, and set out in the Minutes of Status Conference, ECF No. 23, is stayed until further notice of the Court; and, 2. The hearing currently set for June 5, 2017, is vacated. 3. A telephonic status conference shall be held on Friday, July 7, 2017, at 10 a.m. The parties shall file a joint status report by Monday, June 26, 2017. If there is any change in the status of this case, the Parties shall promptly notify the Court. (lc) Modified on 5/8/2017 (lc). (Entered: 05/08/2017)
28 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Ahilan T Arulanantham counsel for Petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. Carmen Iguina is no longer counsel of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Petitioner Ahilan T. Arulanantham. (Arulanantham, Ahilan) (Entered: 05/18/2017)
29 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: NOTICE TO PARTIES: Effective June 1, 2017, Judge Standish is located at the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building, COURTROOM 640 on the 6th floor, located at 255 East Temple Street, Los Angeles, California 90012. All Court appearances shall be made in Courtroom 640 of the Roybal Federal Building, and all mandatory chambers copies shall be hand delivered to the judge's mail box located outside the Clerk's Office on the 12th floor of the Roybal Federal Building. The location for filing civil documents in paper format exempted from electronic filing and for viewing case files and other records services remains at the United States Courthouse, 312 North Spring Street, Room G−8, Los Angeles, California 90012. The location for filing criminal documents in paper format exempted from electronic filing remains at the Roybal Federal Building, 255 East Temple Street, Room 178, Los Angeles, California 90012. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (rrey) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 06/06/2017)
30 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Petitioner Ali Khoshbakhti Vayeghan. Dismissal is with prejudice. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Bibring, Peter) (Entered: 06/26/2017)
31 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of an Action (Pursuant to FRCP 41a(1)) 30 , with a proposed order submitted as an attachment.pdf document is a stipulation to dismiss. The following error(s) was found: Incorrect event selected. The correct event is: Stipulation : Dismiss Case. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (lc) (Entered: 06/26/2017)
32 ORDER RE STIPULATED DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 30 by Judge S. James Otero. (Made JS−6. Case Terminated.) (lc) (Entered: 06/28/2017)