Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

17-1200 - Rodriguez v. Brooks et al

Download Files


Document in Context
17-1200 - Rodriguez v. Brooks et al
April 26, 2017
PDF | More
ORDER: The Order 6 of 4/24/2017 setting a hearing on the Motion for Temporary Restraining Order/Preliminary Injunction 3 is vacated and the hearing is vacated. Plaintiff show cause by 5/12/2017 why this action should not be dismissed. See order for additional details. Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 4/25/2017. (LMR)
June 8, 2018
PDF | More
ORDER re: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 22. IT IS ORDERED the motion is granted with respect to Plaintiff's claims for mandamus, declaratory relief, violation of due process, and substantive judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Motion is otherwise DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants file an Answer by 6/22/2018. See attached Order for additional information. Signed by Senior Judge Neil V. Wake on 6/8/2018. (RMW)
August 24, 2018
PDF | More
ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 30) is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff Alberto Rodriguez against Defendants in their official capacity that the September 10, 2016 denial of Plaintiffs security clearance (Doc. 1-2 at 1-2), Acting Port Director Jason West's October 7, 2016 order denying Plaintiff's appeal (Doc. 1-4 at 1), and Directorof Field Operations William K. Brooks's November 8, 2016 order denying Plaintiff's further appeal (Doc. 1-6 at 1) are reversed as invalid and his application is remanded for further action consistent with this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for an Order to Show Cause Why Defendants Should Not Be Held in Civil Contempt (Doc. 32), treated as a motion for award of attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court retains jurisdiction to decide any further judicial review proceedings that may be brought from proceedings on remand. (See document for complete details). Signed by Senior Judge Neil V Wake on 8/24/18. (SLQ)