U.S. Department
of Justice
Litigation Notices
This notice is being given by order of the Court to inform you of a proposed settlement and a fairness hearing as part of a nationwide class action lawsuit called Garcia Perez, et al. v. USCIS, et al., No. 2:22-cv-00806-JHC (W.D. Wash.). This notice is for individuals who are members of a class or sub-class of individuals who, among other criteria, are in the United States; have filed or will file with USCIS or EOIR a complete Asylum Application; and would be eligible for employment authorization under 8 C.F.R. § 274a.12(c)(8) but for the fact that their Asylum EAD Clock was stopped or not started prior to 180 days after the date the alien filed a complete Asylum Application. The proposed settlement seeks to resolve all class and sub-class claims that challenge EOIR and USCIS policies and procedures for administering the “asylum EAD clock,” which is used to determine when an asylum applicant becomes eligible to receive work authorization.
- Garcia Perez, et al. v. USCIS, et al., English Class Notice (PDF)
- Garcia Perez, et al. v. USCIS, et al., Spanish Class Notice (PDF)
On Sept. 26, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington held a Fairness Hearing in Garcia Perez, et al. v. USCIS, et al., No. 2:22-cv-00806-JHC (W.D. Wash.) and granted final approval of the settlement agreement. Previously, on July 29, 2024, the judge granted the parties’ joint motion for class certification for settlement purposes only. The final settlement agreement, the court order certifying the nationwide class and subclasses, and the court order approving the settlement agreement are available at the following links:
- Garcia Perez, et al. v. USCIS, et al., Order Granting Motion for Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement
- Garcia Perez, et al. v. USCIS, et al. Order Granting Joint Motion for Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only
- Garcia Perez, et al. v. USCIS, et al., Final Settlement Agreement (PDF)
Update
- Garcia Perez Fact Sheet (PDF)
- Garcia Perez Frequently Asked Questions
This information is being provided for potential class members under Al Otro Lado v. Mayorkas, Case No. 17-02366 (S.D. Cal.) (“AOL”). AOL class members are individuals who: 1) are not Mexican citizens or nationals; 2) arrived at the U.S.-Mexico land border before July 16, 2019, and were told to wait to enter the United States; 3) entered the United States across the U.S.-Mexico land border on or after July 16, 2019; 4) had the Third-Country Transit Rule (“TCT Rule”) applied to their asylum claim; 5) received a final order denying asylum from the Immigration Court or the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”); and 6) would still like to pursue asylum in the United States. If you believe you are a member of the class described above, you may be entitled to have the Immigration Judge or BIA reopen or reconsider your case to review your asylum application, even if you are no longer in the United States. If you believe you may be eligible for reopening or reconsideration, you may file a motion using the template motion provided below, or you may file your own motion. The template motion includes guidance on how to affirmatively request reopening or reconsideration before the Immigration Judge or the BIA. A motion based on AOL is not subject to the time or numerical limitations of typical motions to reopen and you are not required to pay a filing fee to file the motion. However, if you previously filed a motion to reopen under AOL, subsequent motions to reopen or reconsider may be time or numerically barred, and may require a filing fee.
This notice is being given according to the terms of the settlement agreement to individuals who are members of a class of individuals who are or will be detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1226(a) on a bond set by an ICE officer or immigration judge in the Central District of California. This notice is to inform you of a settlement of a class action lawsuit called Hernandez v. Garland, No. 5:16-cv-00620-JBG (C.D. Cal). The settlement resolves class claims that the U.S. Government failed to consider class members’ ability to pay and alternative conditions of release when setting a bond amount.
This notice is being given by order of the Court to individuals who are members of a class or sub-class of individuals who, among other criteria and within specified timeframes, were encountered by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) within 14 days of entering the United States, expressed a fear of persecution or torture, and were either found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture by DHS and issued a Notice to Appear (NTA) or were issued an NTA without a credible fear determination. This notice is to inform you of a proposed settlement and a fairness hearing as part of a nationwide class action lawsuit called Mendez Rojas, et al., v. Wolf, et al., No. 2:16-cv-01024-RSM (W.D. Wash.). The proposed settlement seeks to resolve class claims that the U.S. Government did not provide sufficient notice that asylum seekers generally must file their asylum applications within one year of arrival in the United States and that the Government did not provide class members with an adequate mechanism to comply with that deadline (the one-year filing deadline).
Update: On Nov. 4, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington held a Fairness Hearing in Mendez Rojas et al., v. Wolf et al., 2:16-cv-01024-RSM (W.D. Wash.), and granted final approval of the settlement agreement. The final settlement agreement and court order approving the settlement agreement are available at the following links:
Mendez Rojas et al., v. Wolf et al., Final Settlement Agreement
Mendez Rojas et al., v. Wolf et al., Order on Joint Motion for Final Approval of Settlement Agreement
The settlement agreement requires U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) to implement a Uniform Procedural Mechanism (UPM) for aliens to file their Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal. USCIS and EOIR expect to publish and implement the UPM on Jan. 26, 2021. If you believe you are a member of the Mendez Rojas class, you will have until April 22, 2022, to raise a claim that the one-year deadline to file an asylum application does not apply to you under the terms of the final settlement agreement. You may raise this claim in a new asylum filing, in a pending filing, or through a motion before the immigration court or the Board of Immigration Appeals, whichever applies.
Actualización: El 4 de noviembre de 2020, el Tribunal de Distrito de EE. UU. para el Distrito Oeste de Washington celebró una Audiencia de Equidad en el caso Méndez Rojas et al. v. Wolf et al., 2: 16-cv-01024-RSM (W.D. Wash.), y se le otorgó la aprobación final del acuerdo judicial. El acuerdo judicial final y la orden que aprueba el acuerdo judicial están disponibles en los siguientes enlaces:
Méndez Rojas et al. v. Wolf et al., Acuerdo Judicial Final
Méndez Rojas et al. v. Wolf et al., Orden sobre la Moción Conjunta para la Aprobación del Acuerdo Judicial Final
El acuerdo de avenimiento requiere que USCIS y la Oficina Ejecutiva de Revisión de Casos de Inmigración (EOIR) implementen un Mecanismo de Procedimiento Uniforme (UPM) para que los extranjeros presenten su Formulario I-589, Solicitud de Asilo y de Suspensión de Remoción. USCIS y EOIR esperan publicar e implementar el UPM el 26 de enero de 2021. Si usted cree que es un miembro del colectivo de demandantes Méndez Rojas tendrá hasta el 22 de abril de 2022 para presentar una reclamación de que el plazo de un año para presentar una solicitud de asilo no aplica a usted según los términos del acuerdo de avenimiento final. Usted puede presentar este reclamo en una nueva solicitud de asilo, en una solicitud pendiente o mediante una moción ante la Corte de Inmigración o la Junta de Apelaciones de Inmigración, según corresponda.
Summary Class Notice (PDF)
Joint Motion Notice and Instructions (PDF)
Unilateral Motion Notice and Instructions (PDF)
- Proposed Class Action Settlement in the Case of Abadia-Peixoto (English) (PDF)
- Proposed Class Action Settlement in the Case of Abadia-Peixoto (Spanish) (PDF)
- Proposed Class Action Settlement in the Case of Abadia-Peixoto (Chinese) (PDF)
- Proposed Class Action Settlement in the Case of Abadia-Peixoto (Punjabi) (PDF)