Fawan Hassan Fadul Mohamed v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Field Office Director and Facility Administrator

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington denied as moot the petitioner's motion to expedite the government's response because the court's scheduling order already provided expedited deadlines. The court denied the petitioner's motion for a temporary restraining order, with leave to refile, finding that he had not shown a likelihood of success on the merits or likely irreparable harm from a transfer.

Holdings

1. The motion to expedite was denied as moot because the existing scheduling order already provided the requested expedited schedule.
2. The motion for a TRO was denied because Petitioner failed to establish the required likelihood of success on the merits and likelihood of irreparable harm.
3. A future TRO motion must provide sufficient information concerning Petitioner's circumstances and the reasons for relief and must comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 and Local Civil Rule 65.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the motion to expedite the government's response should be granted when the court's existing scheduling order already provided the requested relief.
2. Whether Petitioner was entitled to a temporary restraining order preventing his transfer from Tacoma based on the Winter factors.

Disposition

other