Nightingale v. U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
507 F. Supp. 3d 1193 (2020)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Alien Registration Files (A-Files) contained information needed by noncitizens and their attorneys to defend against removal, obtain immigration benefits, or acquire citizenship. A-Files were held by the United States Department of Homeland Security and its component agencies, US Citizenship and Immigration Services and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (collectively, USCIS) (defendants). To obtain copies of A-Files, noncitizens or their attorneys had to file a request with USCIS. However, for over eight years, USCIS had a backlog of A-File requests that delayed the response time. In June of 2019, the average processing time was between 55 and 90 days. Zachary Nightingale and other noncitizens and their attorneys (collectively, the immigrants) (plaintiffs) sued USCIS, alleging that the agency’s delay in processing A-File requests violated the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). USCIS did not deny that its response times failed to meet the deadlines required under FOIA. However, it pointed to the incredibly high volume of requests it received and claimed that it was already making a good-faith effort to decrease delays. The district court considered the immigrants’ motion for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Orrick, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.