Case: ACLU of Southern California v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

2:18-cv-08917 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: Oct. 16, 2018

Closed Date: Feb. 26, 2020

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On October 16, 2018, the ACLU of Southern California filed this lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The plaintiff sued under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. §552, seeking the release of records related to U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) agents’ practice of misrepresenting or concealing their identity when conducting enforcement actions. Specifically, the plaintiff sought to ord…

On October 16, 2018, the ACLU of Southern California filed this lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The plaintiff sued under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. §552, seeking the release of records related to U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) agents’ practice of misrepresenting or concealing their identity when conducting enforcement actions. Specifically, the plaintiff sought to order the defendant to produce the public records requested on February 12, 2019, without further delay and to declare that the defendant failed to comply with FOIA.

Judge John A. Kronstadt approved the defendant’s Ex Parte Application to Stay Case due to the lapse in appropriations to the Department of Justice on January 11, 2019. The stay was lifted on February 5, 2019.

In an August 15, 2019, status update, the defendant stated that it had produced records to the plaintiff on several occasions since litigation commenced and that the parties were continuing to discuss a possible resolution to the case without the need for further litigation.

On February 3, 2020, the parties filed a joint stipulation to dismiss the case. The plaintiff stated that it was satisfied with the documents the defendant had produced in response to the FOIA request. On February 4, Judge Kronstadt issued an order dismissing the case with prejudice. The parties were to bear their own costs, fees, and expenses.

The case is closed.

Summary Authors

Sichun Liu (2/10/2019)

Sam Kulhanek (4/18/2020)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/14858727/parties/aclu-of-southern-california-v-united-states-department-of-homeland/


Judge(s)

Kronstadt, John Arnold (California)

McDermott, John E. (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff
Attorney for Defendant

Barragan, Matthew J. (California)

Hanna, Nicola T. (California)

Harris, David M (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

2:18-cv-08917

Docket [PACER]

ACLU of Southern California v. United States Department of Homeland Security

Feb. 26, 2020

Feb. 26, 2020

Docket
1

2:18-cv-08917

Complaint

ACLU of Southern California v. United States Department of Homeland Security

Oct. 16, 2018

Oct. 16, 2018

Complaint
27

2:18-cv-08917

Stipulation of Dismissal

ACLU of Southern California v. United States Department of Homeland Security

Feb. 3, 2020

Feb. 3, 2020

Settlement Agreement

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/14858727/aclu-of-southern-california-v-united-states-department-of-homeland/

Last updated March 22, 2025, 10:40 a.m.

ECF Number Date Description Link
1 Oct. 16, 2018

Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening)

1 Exhibit FOIA Request

View on RECAP

RECAP
2 Oct. 16, 2018

Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71)

RECAP
3 Oct. 16, 2018

Summons Request

RECAP
4 Oct. 16, 2018

Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties

RECAP
5 Oct. 16, 2018

Corporate Disclosure Statement

RECAP
6 Oct. 16, 2018

Notice of Assignment to United States Judges(CV-18) - optional html form

RECAP
7 Oct. 16, 2018

Notice to Parties of Court-Directed ADR Program (ADR-8) - optional html form

RECAP
8 Oct. 16, 2018

Notice of Deficiency in Request to Issue Summons

RECAP
9 Oct. 16, 2018

Summons Request

RECAP
10 Oct. 16, 2018

Summons Issued (Attorney Civil Case Opening)

RECAP
11 Oct. 16, 2018

Reassign Case upon Recusal of Magistrate Judge (CV-110)

RECAP
12 Oct. 17, 2018

Order

RECAP
13 Nov. 14, 2018

Stipulation Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less)

RECAP
14 Dec. 17, 2018

Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer (More than 30 days)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

RECAP
15 Dec. 21, 2018

Order Extending Answer Due Deadline

RECAP
16 Dec. 27, 2018

Motion to Stay Case

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

RECAP
17 Jan. 11, 2019

Order on Motion to Stay Case

RECAP
18 Feb. 1, 2019

Report

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

RECAP
19 Feb. 5, 2019

Order

RECAP
20 March 26, 2019

Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer (More than 30 days)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

RECAP
21 April 2, 2019

Order Extending Answer Due Deadline

RECAP
22 April 2, 2019

Text Only Scheduling Notice

RECAP
April 2, 2019

Text Only Scheduling Notice

23 June 26, 2019

Answer to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening)

RECAP
24 June 26, 2019

Order

RECAP
25 Aug. 15, 2019

Joint Report Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan

1 Schedule A to Scheduling Order

View on PACER

RECAP
26 Sept. 19, 2019

~Util - Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings

RECAP
27 Feb. 3, 2020

STIPULATION to Dismiss Case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) filed by Defendant United States Department of Homeland Security. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Barragan, Matthew) (Entered: 02/03/2020)

PACER
28 Feb. 3, 2020

STIPULATION for Order Extending Plaintiff's Time to File Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs filed by Defendant United States Department of Homeland Security. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Barragan, Matthew) (Entered: 02/03/2020)

PACER
29 Feb. 4, 2020

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE by Judge John A. Kronstadt. The Stipulation to Dismiss Case 27 is approved and so ordered. Accordingly, all dates and deadlines are vacated. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (cw)

RECAP
30 Feb. 4, 2020

Order

RECAP
31 Feb. 26, 2020

NOTICE of Settlement filed by Defendant United States Department of Homeland Security. (Barragan, Matthew) (Entered: 02/26/2020)

PACER
32 Feb. 26, 2020

STIPULATION to Dismiss Case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) filed by Defendant United States Department of Homeland Security.(Barragan, Matthew) (Entered: 02/26/2020)

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory:

California

Case Type(s):

Immigration and/or the Border

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Trump Administration 1.0: Challenges to the Government

Key Dates

Filing Date: Oct. 16, 2018

Closing Date: Feb. 26, 2020

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

ACLU of Southern California.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Attorney Organizations:

ACLU of Southern California

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Federal

Department of Homeland Security

Defendant Type(s):

Law-enforcement

Case Details

Causes of Action:

FOIA (Freedom of Information Act), 5 U.S.C. § 552

Other Dockets:

Central District of California 2:18-cv-08917

Available Documents:

Complaint (any)

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Issues

General/Misc.:

Records Disclosure

Recommended Citation