University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Wang v. Reno IM-NY-0029
Docket / Court CV-93-5523 (CPS) ( E.D.N.Y. )
State/Territory New York
Case Type(s) Immigration
Case Summary
On December 7, 1993, numerous citizens of the People's Republic of China who were detained pending deportation after being denied asylum, brought suit in the Eastern District of New York, challenging the standard used by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") to evaluate asylum applications based ... read more >
On December 7, 1993, numerous citizens of the People's Republic of China who were detained pending deportation after being denied asylum, brought suit in the Eastern District of New York, challenging the standard used by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") to evaluate asylum applications based on coercive family planning practices in China. Plaintiffs sought declaratory, injunctive, mandamus, and habeas relief. Plaintiffs also sought a TRO, a preliminary injunction and class certification. The original plaintiffs also sought leave to add additional parties to the action.

The government opposed the relief plaintiffs sought and moved to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

On September 8, 1994, the District Court (Senior Judge Charles P. Sifton) granted defendants' motion to dismiss, except for the claims of two plaintiffs, for failure to exhaust administrative remedies and for lack of jurisdiction. Plaintiffs' motions for a TRO, a preliminary injunction, class certification and leave to amend the pleadings were denied. Wang v. Reno, 862 F.Supp. 801 (E.D.N.Y. 1994). One plaintiff appealed, but the appeal was subsequently withdrawn.

We have no further information on the case.

Dan Dalton - 10/23/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
General
Habeas Corpus
Immigration
Asylum - criteria
Asylum - procedure
Deportation - judicial review
Family
Refugees
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq.
Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.
Defendant(s) Immigration and Naturalization Service
Plaintiff Description Citizens of the People's Republic of China who were detained pending deportation after being denied asylum and who asserted coercive family planning practices in China.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Defendant
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief None
Source of Relief None
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year 1997
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Threats to the Future of the Immigration Class Action
Washington University Journal of Law and Policy
By: Jill E. Family (Widener University School of Law)
Citation: 27 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol'y 71 (2008)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
1:93-cv-05523-CPS (E.D.N.Y.) 03/25/1997
IM-NY-0029-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Memorandum and Order 09/06/1994 (862 F.Supp. 801) (E.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0029-0001.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Judges Sifton, Charles Proctor (E.D.N.Y.)
IM-NY-0029-0001 | IM-NY-0029-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Bembi, Bruno Joseph (New York)
IM-NY-0029-0001 | IM-NY-0029-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Dunn, Scott (New York)
IM-NY-0029-0001 | IM-NY-0029-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -