CRISTIAN DOE V. ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, No. 20-55279 (9th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 19 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CRISTIAN DOE; DIANA DOE, Petitioners-Appellees, No. 20-55279 D.C. No. 3:19-cv-02119-DMS-AGS v. ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of Homeland Security; et al., ORDER Respondents-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California Dana M. Sabraw, Chief District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted November 13, 2020 Submission Vacated December 15, 2020 Resubmitted July 16, 2021 Pasadena, California Before: CHRISTEN and WATFORD, Circuit Judges, and ROSENTHAL,* District Judge. On December 15, 2020, we vacated submission of this appeal pending the Supreme Court’s disposition of Mayorkas v. Innovation Law Lab, No. 19-1212, an * The Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal, Chief United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, sitting by designation. appeal that challenged the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). The Department of Homeland Security terminated the MPP on June 1, 2021. Memorandum from Alejandro N. Mayorkas regarding Termination of the Migrant Protection Protocols Program 7 (June 1, 2021), available at https://go.usa.gov/x6s7E. On June 21, 2021, the Supreme Court issued an order vacating the judgment in Innovation Law Lab and remanding to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to direct the district court to vacate as moot the April 8, 2019 preliminary injunction that enjoined the Department of Homeland Security from implementing the MPP. This appeal before us challenges a discrete procedural sub-issue of the nowterminated MPP. Because the Supreme Court decided that a challenge to the MPP as a whole was moot after the government terminated the program, we conclude that the narrower question presented in this appeal is also moot. Accordingly, we remand this case to the district court with instructions to vacate the January 14, 2020 order granting the motion for classwide preliminary injunction as moot. See United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950).1 REMANDED 1 Appellees’ motion to file a supplemental brief, ECF 30, is DENIED as moot. Appellees’ motion to supplement the record on appeal, ECF 55, is GRANTED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
