Franciscot Auguste v. Joseph B. Edlow

An entry titled 'Extension of Time to Answer' was added to the docket but provides no further detail in the text-only entry.

An entry titled 'Extend Time to File Answer' was added to the docket but provides no further detail in the text-only entry.

A reply related to a motion was filed (entry provides no further detail).

The defendant Joseph B. Edlow filed an opposition to the petitioners' motion for preliminary injunction.

An attorney filed a notice of appearance on behalf of the defendant Joseph B. Edlow.

The court issued a scheduling notice continuing the hearing on the petitioners' motion for preliminary injunction from May 8, 2026 to May 29, 2026 at 9:00 a.m., and directed counsel to appear in person in Courtroom 9D.

The clerk issued a notice of deficiency stating the request for entry of default was forwarded to the assigned judge and could not be entered by the clerk.

The petitioners filed an errata correcting page 22 of the complaint.

The petitioner filed proof of service showing that the motion for preliminary injunction (and exhibits) was served on April 3, 2026.

A group of petitioners filed a request that the clerk enter default against defendant Joseph B. Edlow.

Two individual petitioners filed notices voluntarily dismissing their claims pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) as to defendant Joseph B. Edlow.

Three individual petitioners filed notices voluntarily dismissing their claims pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1); the filings state that the remaining individual petitioners do not dismiss their claims at this time.

An individual petitioner filed a notice voluntarily dismissing his claims pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1); the filing states that the remaining individual petitioners do not dismiss their claims at this time.

Multiple petitioners filed a motion for a preliminary injunction asking the court to enjoin defendants from holding decisions on petitioners' Forms I-485; the filing noted a hearing set for 2026-05-08 at 09:00 AM before Judge John W. Holcomb.

Two individual petitioners filed notices voluntarily dismissing their claims pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) as to defendant Joseph B. Edlow.

An individual petitioner filed a notice voluntarily dismissing his claims pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1); the filing states that the remaining individual petitioners do not dismiss their claims at this time.

Two individual petitioners filed notices voluntarily dismissing their claims pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1); the filings state that the remaining individual petitioners do not dismiss their claims at this time.

The petitioner filed proof of service showing that the summons and complaint were served on the United States Attorney's Office and other agencies/offices as listed.

A standing order issued by Judge John W. Holcomb was entered on the docket.

The case was reassigned from Magistrate Judge Douglas McCormick to District Judge John W. Holcomb for all further proceedings, with discovery matters possibly assigned to Magistrate Judge John D. Early.

A 60-day summons was issued as to the defendant Joseph B. Edlow in connection with the complaint.

The petitioner filed a notice identifying interested parties in the case.

The clerk notified the parties that the case was assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Douglas F. McCormick and recorded a declination of consent.

On 2026-03-20 the plaintiff filed a complaint (filing fee $405). The filing included three exhibits — the December 2, 2025 USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0192, the January 1, 2026 USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0194, and a USCIS email to Senator Adam Schiff's office — and attorney Hamdy Maher Masri was added as counsel for the plaintiff.

The petitioner requested that the clerk issue a summons on the complaint in the civil case opening.

A declination of consent form was received and filed with the court on the stated date.

A civil cover sheet was filed by the petitioner as part of opening the case.