Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01469/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01469-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CARLOS ENRIQUE SILVA-JACINTO,

Petitioner,

 v.

DAVID N. STILL, District Director, United

States Citizenship and Immigration Services;

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of the

Department of Homeland Security; ALBERTO

GONZALES, Attorney General of the United

States,

Respondents. /

No. C 05-01469 JSW

NOTICE OF TENTATIVE

RULING AND QUESTIONS

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, PLEASE TAKE

NOTICE OF THE FOLLOWING TENTATIVE RULING AND QUESTIONS FOR THE

HEARING SCHEDULED ON MAY 6, 2005:

The Court has reviewed the parties’ papers and, thus, does not wish to hear the parties

reargue matters addressed in those pleadings. If the parties intend to rely on authorities not

cited in their briefs, they are ORDERED to notify the Court and opposing counsel of these

authorities reasonably in advance of the hearing and to make copies available at the hearing. If

the parties submit such additional authorities, they are ORDERED to submit the citations to the

authorities only, without argument or additional briefing. See N.D. Civil Local Rule 7-3(d). 

The parties will be given the opportunity at oral argument to explain their reliance on such

authority.

Case 3:05-cv-01469-JSW Document 12 Filed 05/04/05 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

The Court tentatively GRANTS Petitioner’s application for a temporary restraining

order pending resolution of his derivative beneficiary status under his wife Odulia Veronica

Rodas-Rodensas’ asylum application.

The parties will each have 15 minutes to address the following questions:

1. What is the status of Odulia Veronica Rodas-Rodensas’ asylum application? Is

it undisputed that Petitioner would qualify as a derivative beneficiary under his

wife’s asylum application? How long could the wife’s asylum process take and

can this Court order a temporary restraining order with an indefinite termination?

2. Does Petitioner have any authority for the proposition that the ICE is prohibited

from executing an alien’s final removal order if the alien is listed on his spouse’s

application for asylum? Does the Government have any authority for the

proposition that the Court should not stay the execution of an alien’s final

removal order if the alien is listed on his spouse’s application for asylum?

3. Has Petitioner established a possibility of irreparable harm or that the balance of

hardships tips sharply in his favor by demonstrating that his deportation would

cause family separation and that he would be subject to a ten-year bar to re-entry

to the United States?

4. Do the parties have any further to add?

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 4, 2005 /s/ Jeffrey S. White 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-01469-JSW Document 12 Filed 05/04/05 Page 2 of 2