Case 1:19-cv-01211-WJ-KK Document 6 Filed 12/31/19 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO

______________________

O CENTRO ESPIRITA BENEFICENTE

UNIAO DO VEGETAL IN THE U.S.;
JOSE CARLOS GARCIA; DANIELLE
HOUNSELL SILVA GARCIA; and
J.H.S.G., a minor;

Plaintiffs,

v. No. 1:19-cv-1211-WJ-KK

CHAD WOLF, Acting Secretary of

Homeland Security; DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY, an agency of
the United States; KENNETH T.
CUCCINELLI, Acting Director of U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services;
UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION SERVICES, an agency of
the United States; WILLIAM P. BARR,
U.S. Attorney General; CHRISTOPHER
WRAY, Director of FBI; FEDERAL
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS, an
Agency of the United States; MIKE
POMPEO, U.S. Secretary of State; U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, an Agency of
the United States;

Defendants.

ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

AND/OR PRELIMINARY INJUCTIVE RELIEF AND
REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY HEARING

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Temporary Restraining

Order and/or Preliminary Injunctive Relief and Request for Emergency Hearing [Doc. 3], filed

December 27, 2019. Plaintiffs request the Court hold an emergency hearing on their motion within

a week from its filing and order Defendants to immediately adjudicate Plaintiffs’ immigration
 Case 1:19-cv-01211-WJ-KK Document 6 Filed 12/31/19 Page 2 of 2

applications. Doc. 3 at 18. Plaintiffs are not requesting the Court issue an ex parte restraining order,

as they notified Defendants of their complaint and motion on December 26, 2019. Doc. 3-16.

Plaintiffs explained the harm they expect should Defendants not immediately adjudicate

their immigration applications. Doc. 3 at 14-16. Their explanation, however, fails to justify the

Court scheduling a hearing that allows little to no time for Defendants to respond and, more

significantly, fails to justify the Court taking the extraordinary measure of ruling on Plaintiffs’

motion before Defendants’ position can be heard. Accordingly, Defendants have until January 10,

2020 to file a response. Plaintiffs may file a reply if they so desire and then, after reviewing the

submissions of the parties, the Court will determine whether a hearing is necessary or whether the

matter can be decided based on the pleadings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

________________________________________
WILLIAM P. JOHNSON
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE