Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_20-cv-02064/USCOURTS-cand-3_20-cv-02064-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 465
Nature of Suit: Other Immigration Actions
Cause of Action: 8:1105(a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Detainee

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SOFIA BAHENA ORTUÑO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

DAVID JENNINGS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 20-cv-02064-MMC 

ORDER RE: JOINT STATEMENT 

REGARDING RELEASE CONDITIONS

Before the Court is the parties' Joint Statement Regarding Release Conditions, 

filed April 10, 2020, whereby the parties set forth their respective positions as to whether 

the Court should impose conditions of release in addition to those set forth in the Court's 

order of April 8, 2020. Having read and considered the Joint Statement, the Court rules 

as follows.

The Court finds good cause exists to incorporate in its orders of release the 

additional conditions requested by respondents, as set forth in the Joint Statement on 

page 5, lines 10-14, specifically, (1) that petitioners be subject to the Immigration and 

Customs Enforcement's ("ICE") usual orders of release and (2) that petitioners may, at 

ICE's election, be monitored by GPS.

The Court does not find good cause has been shown for imposition of the 

proposed additional conditions requested by respondents, as set forth in the Joint 

Statement on page 5, lines 4-9, specifically, (1) that ICE may, without advance notice to 

the Court or petitioners, re-detain a petitioner who violates a condition of release, and

(2) that ICE may, without advance notice to the Court or petitioners, re-detain a petitioner

who is subject to a final order of removal and as to whom a travel document is obtained. 

Case 3:20-cv-02064-MMC Document 43 Filed 04/13/20 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

If respondents are of the view that a petitioner has violated a condition of release or it 

obtains a travel document for a petitioner who is subject to a final order of removal, they 

may move the Court for reconsideration of the order of release.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 13, 2020

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

Case 3:20-cv-02064-MMC Document 43 Filed 04/13/20 Page 2 of 2