Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam v. Usdhs, 18-55313 (2020)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Number: 18-55313 Visitors: 11
Filed: Aug. 12, 2020
Latest Update: Aug. 12, 2020
Summary: FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT VIJAYAKUMAR THURAISSIGIAM, No. 18-55313 Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 3:18 cv-0135 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND AJB SECURITY; U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION; U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION ORDER SERVICES; U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT; CHAD F. WOLF, Acting Secretary of DHS; WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General; MARK A. MORGAN, Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Commissioner of CBP; THOMAS HOMAN; KENNE
More
                 FOR PUBLICATION

  UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
       FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT


VIJAYAKUMAR THURAISSIGIAM,              No. 18-55313
            Petitioner-Appellant,
                                          D.C. No.
                 v.
                                        3:18 cv-0135
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND                 AJB
SECURITY; U.S. CUSTOMS AND
BORDER PROTECTION; U.S.
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION               ORDER
SERVICES; U.S. IMMIGRATION AND
CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT; CHAD F.
WOLF, Acting Secretary of DHS;
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney
General; MARK A. MORGAN, Senior
Official Performing the Duties of the
Commissioner of CBP; THOMAS
HOMAN; KENNETH T. CUCCINELLI,
Senior Official Performing the
Duties of the Director, U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration
Services; PETE FLORES, San Diego
Field Director, CBP; GREGORY
ARCHAMBEAULT, San Diego Field
Office Director, ICE; FRED
FIGUEROA, Warden, Otay Mesa
Detention Center,
              Respondents-Appellees.
2                THURAISSIGIAM V. USDHS

    On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States

                    Filed August 12, 2020

     Before: A. Wallace Tashima, M. Margaret McKeown,
             and Richard A. Paez, Circuit Judges.

                            Order


                          ORDER

    In accordance with the mandate of the Supreme Court of
the United States, “remand[ing] the case with directions that
the application for habeas corpus be dismissed,” United
States v. Thuraissigiam, 
140 S. Ct. 1959
, 1983 (2020), the
judgment of the district court, which dismissed with prejudice
the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Thuraissigiam v. U.S.
Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 
287 F. Supp. 3d 1077
, 1083 (S.D.
Cal. 2018), is

      AFFIRMED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer