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

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

12-797 - Vazquez-Mentado v. Buitron et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
12-797 - Vazquez-Mentado v. Buitron et al
May 28, 2013
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDERED, that Defendants Motion (Dkt. No. 33) to dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 26) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part consistent with this Memorandum-Decision and Order; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants Motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 26) as against Defendant Oaks is GRANTED and Plaintiffs Bivens action against Defendant Oaks is DISMISSED without prejudice; and it is further ORDERED, that if Plaintiff wishes to amend his Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 26) to replead his claim against Defendant Oaks, he must do so within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order. Any such amendment may address only the Bivens claim against Defendant Oaks and the allegation of a pattern and practice of unconstitutional arrests. If Plaintiff does not amend his Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 26) consistent with the terms of this Memorandum-Decision and Order within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order, this case will proceed with the Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 26) as the operative pleading and Defendant Oaks and the claim against him will be dismissed from this case without further order of the Court; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants Motion (Dkt. No. 33) to dismiss Plaintiffs FTCA claims is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants Motion (Dkt. No. 33) to dismiss Plaintiffs Bivens action against Defendants other than Defendant Oaks is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants Motion (Dkt. No. 33) to dismiss the John Doe Defendants is DENIED as premature; and it is further ORDERED, that the Court RESERVES JUDGMENT on the issue of the availability and propriety of declaratory relief in this action. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on May 28, 2013. (sas)
January 29, 2014
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDERED, that the Motion (Dkt. No. 51) to dismiss is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; and it is further ORDERED, that, to the extent it seeks dismissal of Plaintiffs Fifth Amendment Bivens claim and claim for declaratory relief, the Motion (Dkt. No. 51) to dismiss is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED, that the Motion (Dkt. No. 51) to dismiss is otherwise DENIED. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on January 29, 2014. (sas)
July 9, 2014
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDERED, that the Decision and Order (Dkt. No. 104) of March 21, 2014, is AFFIRMED to the extent it denied Plaintiffs Motion (Dkt. No. 83) to compel responses to discovery requests regarding: (1) trainings received by Defendants Buitron and Lorenzo relating to post-arrest/detention procedures; (2) Defendants Buitron and Lorenzos receipt of bonuses; and (3) databases Defendants Buitron and Lorenzo had access to at the Border Patrol Station following Plaintiffs arrest, including relevant screenshots; and it is further ORDERED, that the Decision and Order (Dkt. No. 104) of March 21, 2014, is REVERSED to the extent it denied Plaintiffs Motion (Dkt. No. 83) to compel responses to discovery requests regarding: (1) trainings received by Defendants Buitron and Lorenzo prior to 2007 relating to procedures for investigating an alleged unlawful alien (including, but not limited to, investigating claims of U.S. citizenship); performing and relying upon records checks, detention and arrest procedures and applicable law, regulation, and policy (including, but not limited to, when arrest without a warrant may be made); and (2) records of Defendants Buitron and Lorenzos prior encounters with U.S. citizens, permanent residents, and other lawful aliens. Defendants shall produce responses to these discovery requests within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order, unless the assigned magistrate judge modifies this deadline; and it is further ORDERED, that the Court RESERVES DECISION on Plaintiffs appeal of the Decision and Order (Dkt. No. 104) of March 21, 2014, to the extent it denied Plaintiffs Motion (Dkt. No. 83) to compel responses to discovery requests regarding: (1) databases Defendants Buitron and Lorenzo had access to prior to encountering Plaintiff on the day of his arrest, and at the point where Defendants Buitron and Lorenzo encountered Plaintiff, including a screenshot of what each database showed for Plaintiff; and (2) an unredacted version of Page 2 of the records check relied on by Defendants Buitron and Lorenzo. Defendants shall provide these materials to the Court for in camera review within ten (10) days of the filing date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on July 09, 2014. (sas)