Opinion

Daniil Sheiko v. Thomas Giles

Court
District Court, C.D. California
Filed
Oct 15, 2019
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.9%

The opinion

CIVIL MINUTES –GENERAL

Case No. EDCV 19-1859-JFW (KS) Date: October 15, 2019

Title Daniil Sheikov. Thomas Giles,et al.

Present: The Honorable: Karen L. Stevenson, United States Magistrate Judge

Gay Roberson N/A

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS)ORDERTO SHOW CAUSE WHY PRELIMINARY

INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT BE ISSUED

On September 26, 2019, Petitioner, a foreign national, who is subject to a final order of

removal, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody pursuant to 28

U.S.C. §2241. (Dkt. No. 1.) On October 7, 2019, Respondent filed a Notice of Imminent Removal

of Petitioner, stating that Petitioner’s final removal order was issued more than two years ago and

Petitionerwill be subject to removal at any time from October 14, 2019 onward. (Dkt. No. 6.) On

October 11, 2019, Petitioner moved for preliminary injunctive relief to enjoin the Department of

Homeland Security from removing him before the Board of Immigration Appeals adjudicates his

Motion to Reopen his immigration proceedings. (Dkt. No. 8.) United States District Judge John

F. Walter granted Petitioner’s request for a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) and ordered

that Petitioner not be removed from the United States for ten (10) days. (Dkt. No. 10.)

A petitioner seeking preliminary injunctive relief “must establish that he is likely to

succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary

relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.”

Am. Trucking Ass’ns v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009) (quoting Winter

v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008)). A preliminary injunction is an

extraordinary remedy that may only be awarded upon a clear showing that the plaintiff is entitled

to such relief. Winter, 555 U.S. at 22.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) Respondent, no later than 4:00pm on October 16,

2019, shall file a Response to this Order that shows cause why a preliminary injunction should

not be issued, and, in particular, addresses whether Petitioner has established each of the four

CIVIL MINUTES –GENERAL

Case No. EDCV 19-1859-JFW (KS) Date: October 15, 2019

Title Daniil Sheikov. Thomas Giles,et al.

requirements for preliminary injunctive relief; and (2) Petitioner may file an optional reply to

Respondent’s response within one(1) day of service thereof.

Alternatively, the parties may discharge this Order by filing,no later than 4:00pm on

October 16, 2019,a stipulation and proposed order that staysremoval pending the adjudication

of Petitioner’s request for a preliminary injunction and sets forth an agreed briefing schedule on

Petitioner’s request for a preliminary injunction.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

:

Initials of Preparer gr

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.