Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02686/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-02686-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 05:0701 Maritime Subsidy Board

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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 1

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARIA SANTILLAN, et al., on behalf of themselves

and others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v. 

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General of the

United States; MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of

the Department of Homeland Security; THE UNITED

STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

SERVICES (USCIS); EDUARDO AGUIRRE, JR.,

USCIS Director; DAVID STILL, USCIS San Francisco

District Director,

 Defendants. 

 

No. C 04-02686 MHP

MEMORANDUM & ORDER

Re: Judgment

Plaintiffs Maria Santillan, et al. represent a class of persons who have been or will be granted

lawful permanent resident status by the Justice Department’s Executive Office of Immigration

Review and to whom the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services has failed to issue

evidence of status as a lawful permanent resident. On December 22, 2005 this court entered a

permanent injunction requiring defendants to commence timely processing of plaintiffs’ status

documentation. Santillan v. Gonzales, No. C 04-02686 MHP, 2005 WL 3542661 (N.D. Cal. Dec.

22, 2005). Now before the court is plaintiffs’ request for entry of a final judgment pursuant to

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.

Case 3:04-cv-02686-MHP Document 157 Filed 01/30/06 Page 1 of 2
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

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

Having reviewed the current posture of the lawsuit and record before the court, the court

concludes that it is not necessary to enter a final judgment at this time. The harm which is the

subject of this lawsuit is ongoing, and the absence of a final judgment will not impair the parties’

legal rights. Plaintiffs’ request for entry of judgment is therefore DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: January 30, 2006 ________________________

MARILYN HALL PATEL

United States District Judge

Northern District of California

Case 3:04-cv-02686-MHP Document 157 Filed 01/30/06 Page 2 of 2