University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Ortiz v. Meissner IM-CA-0044
Docket / Court C--96-2272; C-96-3583 ( N.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Immigration
Case Summary
In 1996, a group of aliens who were administratively denied legalization under either of two amnesty programs established by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (''IRCA''), filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, claiming entitlement to ... read more >
In 1996, a group of aliens who were administratively denied legalization under either of two amnesty programs established by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (''IRCA''), filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, claiming entitlement to work authorization until the completion of judicial review of their deportation orders. The amnesty programs at issue were (1) for ''special agricultural workers'' (''SAWs''), 8 U.S.C. § 1160, and (2) for aliens who have resided in the United States since January 1, 1982, 8 U.S.C. § 1255a. While plaintiffs' applications were pending with the INS under these programs, they obtained temporary work permits. Once the INS denied their applications, it also refused to keep the work permits in force. Plaintiffs sought an injunction requiring the INS to issue work permits to plaintiffs until they fully exhausted judicial review of the INS' denial of their applications.

The District Court (Judge Martin J. Jenkins) issued an injunction requiring the government to issue work permits to the plaintiffs. Ortiz v. Meissner, 1998 WL 184335 (N.D.Cal. April 6, 1998) The government appealed.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Circuit Judge Schroeder) held that Congress intended that the work authorization last only until the final administrative determination, but not through judicial review of subsequent deportation proceedings. The Court reversed the judgment, vacated the injunction, and remanded the case. Ortiz V. Meissner, 179 F.3d 718 (9th Cir. 1999). On remand, summary judgment was entered in favor of defendant. Olivares v. Meissner, 1999 WL 560942 (N.D.Cal. July 28, 1999).

Dan Dalton - 11/19/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Immigration
Employment
Legalization/Amnesty
Status/Classification
Temporary foreign workers program
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA)
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq.
Defendant(s) Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
Plaintiff Description Aliens who were administratively denied legalization under either of two amnesty programs, ‘‘special agricultural workers’’ (‘‘SAWs’’), 8 U.S.C. § 1160, and (2) for aliens who have resided in the United States since January 1, 1982, 8 U.S.C. § 1255a.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought No
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 1999
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)
3:96-cv-02272-MJJ (N.D. Cal.) 09/29/1998
IM-CA-0044-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
3:96-cv-03583-MJJ (N.D. Cal.) 03/23/2000
IM-CA-0044-9001.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Reconsideration and for Summary Judgment 04/06/1998 (1998 WL 184335 / 1998 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 5143) (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0044-0004.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Brief for Defendant/Appellant 10/08/1998
IM-CA-0044-0002.pdf | Detail
Reply Brief for Appellant 11/23/1998
IM-CA-0044-0001.pdf | Detail
USCA Opinion 06/03/1999 (179 F.3d 718)
IM-CA-0044-0003.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Order Entering Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant 07/28/1999 (1999 WL 560942) (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0044-0005.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Judges Fernandez, Ferdinand Francis (Ninth Circuit, C.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0044-0003
Hamilton, Phyllis Jean (N.D. Cal.) [Magistrate]
IM-CA-0044-9000
Jenkins, Martin J. (N.D. Cal.)
IM-CA-0044-0004 | IM-CA-0044-0005 | IM-CA-0044-9000 | IM-CA-0044-9001
Schroeder, Mary Murphy (Ninth Circuit)
IM-CA-0044-0003
Silverman, Barry G. (D. Ariz., Ninth Circuit) [Magistrate]
IM-CA-0044-0003
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Kaufman, Jonathan M. (California)
IM-CA-0044-0003 | IM-CA-0044-9000 | IM-CA-0044-9001
Defendant's Lawyers Duggan, Patricia A. (California)
IM-CA-0044-9000 | IM-CA-0044-9001
Howard, William J. (District of Columbia)
IM-CA-0044-0002
Hunger, Frank W. (District of Columbia)
IM-CA-0044-0001 | IM-CA-0044-0002
Keener, Donald E. (District of Columbia)
IM-CA-0044-0001
Uitti, Mary Beth (California)
IM-CA-0044-9000 | IM-CA-0044-9001
Vanderstar, Thankful T. (District of Columbia)
IM-CA-0044-0001 | IM-CA-0044-0002 | IM-CA-0044-0003
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -