Current stage: Preliminary Injunction
The plaintiffs filed suit challenging USCIS policy memoranda and moved for a preliminary injunction. On April 29, 2026, the magistrate judge issued an order granting the preliminary-injunction motion in part and denying it in part; the defendant thereafter filed an answer and the court issued an order to show cause about compliance. The parties later filed a stipulation and an order on July 10, 2026, but the docket entries do not disclose the stipulation’s terms or a final resolution.
Deadlines, hearings, and court-ordered dates from this docket
Defendant was instructed to file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge by this date.
Opposition to the preliminary-injunction motion was due by this date.
Plaintiffs' reply to the opposition was due by this date.
Hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction rescheduled for 2:00 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom A, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse.
Hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction set for 5/1/2026 at 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom A, 15th Floor before Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse.
Extracted from court filings. Check linked sources for official deadlines.
July 10, 2026
A stipulation and proposed order was filed in the case on 2026-07-10. The docket entry provides no details about the parties' agreement, its terms, or whether the court has signed or entered the proposed order.
July 10, 2026
The docket reflects an entry titled “Order on Stipulation” docketed on 2026-07-10. The entry provides no details about the substance, terms, or procedural effect of the order, so the exact outcome is unclear from the entry text.
July 2, 2026
The defendant filed a response to the court's Order to Show Cause on July 2, 2026, attaching four declarations as exhibits. The filings include declarations labeled S. Burdess, S. Bays, C. Lewis, and E. Martinez.
June 25, 2026
The docket indicates that Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse issued an Order to Show Cause on June 25, 2026. The entry itself contains no details about the order’s instructions, required responses, deadlines, or any hearing, so the exact procedural effect is unclear from the entry text.
June 17, 2026
The plaintiff filed a notice alerting the court to concerns that the defendant is not complying with the court’s Order on the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (ECF No. 25) and attached an exhibit described as evidence of non-compliance. The filing appears to be a notice of concern rather than a court order or ruling.
May 11, 2026
The federal defendant filed an answer to the complaint on May 11, 2026.
April 29, 2026
Key EventThe magistrate judge issued an order on the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, stating the motion was granted in part and denied in part. The docket entry does not describe which specific requests were granted or denied or the terms of any relief.
April 25, 2026
The plaintiffs filed a second notice of supplemental authority in support of their pending motion for a preliminary injunction, attaching as Exhibit A an April 24, 2026 order from Abdulraheemzai v. Noem (N.D. Cal.).
April 24, 2026
The defendant filed a joint statement in response to the court's supplemental briefing order (Order No. 22); the document was filed and entered on 2026-04-24. The filing appears to be the defendant's response to the court's instruction on supplemental briefing and hearings.
April 21, 2026
The magistrate judge entered a supplemental briefing order regarding the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction and rescheduled the motion hearing. The hearing is now set for May 1, 2026 at 10:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom A (15th Floor) before Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse.
April 17, 2026
The docket shows a "Related Case Order" was entered and signed by Judge Susan van Keulen on April 17, 2026; the entry itself does not state the substance or procedural effect of that order.
April 16, 2026
A plaintiff filed a notice providing supplemental authority from other district cases in support of the preliminary-injunction motion. The filing supplies recent decisions for the court's consideration.
April 9, 2026
The clerk issued a notice rescheduling the preliminary-injunction motion hearing to 2026-04-24 at 2:00 PM in San Francisco, Courtroom A before Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse. The entry is a text-only docket notice of the new hearing time.
April 6, 2026
Plaintiffs filed their reply in support of the preliminary-injunction motion on 2026-04-06, attaching multiple exhibits. The filing supplements the motion practice with additional materials.
April 2, 2026
A summons was returned executed for the named plaintiffs as to all defendants, with attached exhibits. The entry indicates the return of service was filed.
March 30, 2026
The federal defendant filed an opposition/response to the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction on 2026-03-30, including several declarations. The filing opposes the requested preliminary relief.
March 27, 2026
A notice of voluntary dismissal of one plaintiff was filed by one named plaintiff. The entry reflects the plaintiff's filed notice but does not state the court has entered a dismissal order.
March 25, 2026
Substitution of counsel was filed, showing a different attorney replacing prior counsel for the federal defendant. The entry records the change in representation.
March 25, 2026
The federal defendant filed a consent/declination form regarding proceeding before a magistrate judge. The entry indicates the defendant's selection on the magistrate-jurisdiction form.
March 24, 2026
The court entered an order denying a motion to relate cases; the order was signed by Judge Susan van Keulen on March 24, 2026.
March 16, 2026
Clerk's notice directed the defendant to file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge by 2026-03-23 and indicates the notice was served by first-class mail. This is the corrected notice after a prior docketing error.
March 16, 2026
Clerk's notice (marked to be disregarded for an earlier incorrect attachment) directed the defendant to file a consent or declination to proceed before a magistrate judge by 2026-03-23 and notes service by first-class mail. The entry corrects an earlier docketing mistake.
March 16, 2026
A notice of appearance was filed on behalf of the named federal defendant. The entry shows counsel entered an appearance in the case.
March 15, 2026
Plaintiffs filed a consent/declination form regarding proceeding before a magistrate judge. The filing indicates plaintiffs' position on magistrate-judge adjudication.
March 15, 2026
Plaintiffs filed a motion for a preliminary injunction with supporting exhibits and requested a hearing; the filing set a hearing for 2026-04-24 at 10:00 AM and set response and reply deadlines (responses due 2026-03-30, replies due 2026-04-06).
March 9, 2026
A summons was issued directed to the named federal defendants. The entry notes the issuance but does not describe return or service.
March 9, 2026
A procedural order specific to immigration mandamus cases was entered; no substantive details are provided in the docket text. The entry appears to be a standard case-management order.
March 9, 2026
Plaintiffs filed a notice regarding a related-case issue, attaching a motion to consider cases related. The entry indicates plaintiffs sought the court consider relatedness with another case.
March 9, 2026
The case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Alex G. Tse, and the docket instructs that counsel is responsible for service; a consent/declination to proceed before a magistrate judge was due by 2026-03-23. The entry also notes a scheduling order would issue within two business days.
March 8, 2026
A multi-plaintiff complaint was filed challenging USCIS policy memoranda, with several exhibits and a summons attached. The filing includes two USCIS policy memoranda as exhibits and requests relief against named federal defendants.
March 8, 2026
A proposed summons was filed with the complaint. No additional detail about service or return is provided in this entry.