Joao Alexandre Dos Reis Franco v. Craig Meyer, et al.

Dos Reis Franco v. Meyer · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · November 25, 2025 · No. 1:25-cv-01620-DAD-CKD

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California partially granted petitioner Joao Alexandre Dos Reis Franco’s ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order challenging his detention by ICE after his arrest at an adjustment-of-status interview. The court ordered his immediate release and prohibited respondents from using the adjustment-of-status process to re-detain him, while denying requests concerning his removal or interference with adjudication of his Form I-485 application.

Holdings

  1. For purposes of temporary injunctive relief, petitioner demonstrated a likelihood of success on his claim that arresting and detaining him at his adjustment-of-status interview violated the INA.
  2. Petitioner satisfied the requirements for temporary injunctive relief by showing likely success on the merits, likely irreparable harm, and that the balance of equities and public interest favored relief.
  3. The court could order petitioner's immediate release and enjoin respondents from using the adjustment-of-status process to re-detain him, but the requested injunction against transfer or removal was moot and the requested injunction concerning adjudication of the Form I-485 was denied.
  4. Petitioner was not required to post a bond under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c).

Questions Presented

  1. Whether petitioner satisfied the preliminary-injunction standard for temporary relief against his immigration detention.
  2. Whether ICE's arrest and detention of petitioner at his adjustment-of-status interview likely violated the Immigration and Nationality Act.
  3. Whether petitioner demonstrated likely irreparable harm, a favorable balance of equities, and a public interest supporting temporary injunctive relief.
  4. Whether respondents should be enjoined from transferring or removing petitioner or from denying or interfering with adjudication of his pending Form I-485 application.
  5. Whether petitioner was required to post a bond under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c).

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (19)

  • Stuhlbarg International Sales Co. v. John D. Brush & Co., 240 F.3d 832, 839 n.7 (9th Cir. 2001)(followed)
  • Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky, 586 F.3d 1109, 1127 (9th Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20, 22 (2008)(followed)
  • Center for Food Safety v. Vilsack, 636 F.3d 1166, 1172 (9th Cir. 2011)(followed)
  • American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 559 F.3d 1046, 1052 (9th Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 632 F.3d 1127, 1131, 1134-35 (9th Cir. 2011)(followed)
  • Klein v. City of San Clemente, 584 F.3d 1196, 1201 (9th Cir. 2009)(followed)
  • Caribbean Marine Services Co. v. Baldrige, 844 F.2d 668, 674 (9th Cir. 1988)(followed)
  • Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. VidAngel, Inc., 869 F.3d 848, 856 (9th Cir. 2017)(followed)
  • You, Xiu Qing v. Nielsen, 321 F. Supp. 3d 451, 464-66, 469 (S.D.N.Y. 2018)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 19.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…