Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4722 Page 1 of 9

Usted tiene el derecho de renunciar a la exencion en virtud del acuerdo.
Los padres o hijos que deseen renunciar a sus derechos en virtud de este Acuerdo de Conciliacion y ser trasladados
sin demora a su pais de origen, tienen derecho a hacerlo mediante la ejecuci6n del siguiente formulario. Cualquier
decision de regresar a su pais de origen debe tomarse afirmativamente, a sabiendas y voluntariamente. El hecho de
no devolver este formulario no se interpretara como una renuncia a sus derechos en virtud del Acuerdo de
Conciliacion.
Instrucciones: .Este :formulario debe ser leido al rnie1nbro de la clase en un idioma que el/ella cntienda. El n1ic1nbro

de la clase debe indicar que opcion esta eligiendo al firmar el cuadro correspondiente a continuacion. Si el miembro
de la clase es un nifio y carece de capacidad o es menor de 14 afios, este formulario debe ser firmado por el padre o
representante legal del nifio. Se deben completar formularios separados para cada miembro de la familia. Los

formularios completados deben enviarse por correo o por correo electronico al abogado para la clase propuesta
apropiada que se establece a continuacion.
Solicito permanecer en los Estados U nidos para buscar alivio de remocion. Entiendo que el acuerdo de
demanda colectiva no garantiza que recibire alivio de la eliminaci6n.

~i:::~e(enle~ L:Jer ,ltlo~Se5 &'eroO~eZ GonrCileL

Estoy solicitando de manera afirmativa, deliberada y voluntaria mi traslado a mi pais de origen lo antes
posible. Entiendo que estoy renunciando a cualquier derecho a permanecer en los Estados Unidos para seguir los
procedimientos establecidos en el acuerdo, incluido cualquier derecho a solicitar asilo u otra proteccion contra la
expulsion.
Nombre (en letra de molde):
Firma:
Tu informacion:
Nombre:
e.
Mo~ ~e~ H~'QJO nde.l (Lonza lei
Fecha de Nacimiento: o I - /Cf - 'L ,Q 0 q
A#: 2 15 533 Cfil
Pais de Ciudadania: --=(0~~~101........,fwe"""-'fY>!...:....:..:q~l-=q_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Centro de detencion (si es aplicable): CqSo heiCJ.of en ,AIUe\lQ Yof k
Domicilio: A IAon /nt;n \q

t rde ("

N ombre( s) del padre( s) ; hijo(s):
hijo(s) A #( s): 2 15
de! padre(s); hijo(s):
T elefono de padre( s) ; hij o( s):

Padr~( ~)_!
Do~1c1ho

1I,;rnJ'e ,- CI IC ~b et h

3~ q c/?J°' 5 o
~J 3 9 II If h
5

$Q

I

$ 3 '5 a

~le l . Bosr o'e f05
jlernq tJ.de2 Gen ?CiId
2.15 5 3 CZ ~'l i
Ge M

°tO;a.'J

3

fl

ng

Nov 06 2018
s/ ArianaF

NUNCPROTUNC
11/2/2018

oT <t:'1 a•Pf

Certificacion de Abogado: Yo represento
(nombre) en su proceso migratorio. Le he
informado a el I ella (y Io su padre I madre o representante legal) de sus derechos en virtud del acuerdo de demanda
(idioma).
colectiva propuesto en
Firma de abogado: _
Nombre de Abogado:
Fecha:
Numero de telefono del abogado:
Domicilio del abogado:

5

 Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4723 Page 2 of 9

;,Quien representa a las Clases?

Grupo de Abogados Propuestos para la Clase de
Padres (Padres en los Estados Unidos):

Grupo de Abogados Propuestos para la Clase
Infantil:

parentsasylumclass@eversheds-sutherland.com

MMMSettlementQuestions@hoganlovells.com
Justin W. Bernick
Zachary W. Best
T. Clark Weymouth
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
555 Thirteenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20004
Telefono: (888) 365-1112
Fax: (202) 637-5910

Wilson G. Barmeyer
Carol T. Mcclarnon
John H. Fleming
EVERSHEDSSUTHERLAND(US)LLP
700 Sixth Street NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20001
Telefono: (202) 220-8628
Fax: (202) 637-3593

Consejo Propuesto para Padres Retirados:

Sirine Shebaya
Johnathan Smith
MUSLIM ADVOCATES

familyseparation@aclu.org
Lee Gelernt
Judy Rabinovitz
Anand Balakrishnan
Stephen Kang
Spencer Amdur
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION
125 Broad St.
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telefono: (212) 549-2660
Fax: (212) 549-2654

Simon Y. Sandoval-Moshenberg
Sophia Gregg
LEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTER

4

 Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4724 Page 3 of 9

Usted tiene el derecho de objetar el acuerdo.
Aunque puede renunciar a sus derechos de buscar alivio en virtud de este Acuerdo de Conciliaci6n, no
puede excluirse del acuerdo. Sin embargo, puede solicitar al Tribunal que rechace la aprobaci6n
presentando una objeci6n. Si la Corte niega la aprobaci6n, las demandas continuaran. Si eso es lo que
quieres que suceda, debes objetar. Usted puede objetar el acuerdo propuesto por escrito. Tambien puede
presentarse en la Audiencia de aprobaci6n definitiva, ya sea en persona o por medio de su propio
abogado. Todas las objeciones escritas y documentos de apoyo deben (a) identificar claramente los
siguientes nombres y numeros de casos: MMM v. Sessions, Caso No. 3: 18-cv-1832-DMS (S.D. Cal.)
y Ms. L. v. ICE, Caso No. 3: 18-cv-428-DMS (S.D. Cal.), (b) enviarse al Tribunal enviandolos por
correo al Secretario de Acci6n de Clase, Tribunal de Distrito de los Estados Unidos para el Distrito Sur
de California, Palacio de Justicia de San Diego, 333 West Broadway, San Diego, CA 92101, o
presentandolos personalmente en cualquier lugar del Tribunal de Distrito de los Estados Unidos para el
Distrito Sur de California, y (c) debe presentarse o enviarse por correo postal el 2 de N oviembre de 2018
o antes.
;,Cuando y donde decidira el Tribunal si aprueba el acuerdo?
La audiencia de aprobaci6n final se llevara a cabo el 15 de Noviembre de 2018, a la 10:30 a.m. (PT) en
la sala 13A, piso 13, suite 1310, 333 West Broadway, San Diego, CA 92101, para determinar la
imparcialidad, razonabilidad y adecuaci6n de la propuesta Asentamiento. La fecha puede cambiar sin
previo aviso a la clase.
;,Don de puedo ob ten er mas informacion?
Este aviso resume el acuerdo propuesto. Para conocer los terminos y condiciones exactos del acuerdo,
consulte el Acuerdo de Acuerdo adjunto, contactando al abogado de la clase que se identifica a
continuaci6n, accediendo al expediente del Tribunal en este caso a traves del sistema de Acceso Publico
a los Registros Electr6nicos del Tribunal (PACER) en https: // ecf.casd.uscourts.gov, o visitando la
oficina del Secretario de la Corte del Tribunal de Distrito de los Estados Unidos para el Distrito Sur de
California, San Diego, entre las 8:30 am y las 4:30 pm, de Lunes a Viernes, excluyendo dias festivos.
POR FAVOR, NO LLAME A LA OFICINA DEL TRIBUNAL 0 AL TRIBUNAL DE CORREO
PARA CONSULTAR SOBRE ESTE ACUERDO

3

 Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4725 Page 4 of 9

AVISO DE ACUERDO PROPUESTO y
FORMULARIO DE ELECCI6N DEL ACUERDO
Si estuvo separado de su(s) padre(s) o hijo(s) en la frontera,
sus derechos pueden verse afectados por un acuerdo de demanda colectiva propuesto.
Se ha llegado a un acuerdo propuesto en las demandas colectivas en relaci6n con el mecanismo por el
cual ciertos padres e hijos separados pueden solicitar asilo u otra proteccion en los Estados Unidos. Los
juicios son de MMM v. Sessions, Caso No. 3: 18-cv-1832-DMS (S.D. Cal.), MMM v. Sessions, Caso
No. 1: 18-cv-1835-PLF (D.D.C.), Ms. L. v. ICE, Caso No. 3: 18-cv-428-DMS (SD Cal.), y Dora v.
Sessions, Caso No. 18-cv-1938 (D.D.C.).

;,De que se tratan estas demandas?
Estas demandas fueron presentadas en nombre de padres e hij os que fueron separados despues de ser
detenidos por el gobiemo de los Estados Unidos en o cerca de la frontera. Los demandantes alegan que
el gobiemo de los Estados Unidos no les dio a estos padres e hijos la oportunidad adecuada de buscar
asilo u otra proteccion contra la expulsion en los Estados Unidos. El juez que supervisa las demandas
detuvo temporalmente el traslado de las familias que se reunieron despues de haber sido separados en la
frontera. Los demandantes y el gobiemo de los Estados Unidos posteriormente acordaron un acuerdo,
que otorgani a los padres e hijos el acceso a los procedimientos para solicitar asilo u otra proteccion
contra la expulsion en los Estados Unidos.

;, Quien es ta incluido?
Un padre puede ser un miembro de la Clase del Acuerdo de Padres si el o ella:
• Es un padre extranjero adulto que entro a los Estados Unidos en o entre los puertos de entrada
designados con su(s) hijo(s),
• fue detenido bajo custodia de inmigracion por el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS),
• Tiene un hijo que estuvo o esta separado de el o ella y que se encontraba bajo la custodia del
DHS, la custodia de la Oficina de Reasentamiento de Refugiados (ORR, por sus siglas en ingles),
o cuidado de crianza temporal de ORR a partir del 26 de Junio de 2018.
• Se le ordeno reunificarse de conformidad con la Orden de la Corte en la Sra. L. v. Estados
Unidos de Inmigracion y Control de Aduanas, No. 18-428 (S.D. Cal. 26 de Junio de 2018); y
• Ha estado presente fisicamente continuamente en los Estados Unidos desde el 26 de Junio de
2018.
El acuerdo tambien refleja el acuerdo de las partes con respecto a los individuos que se ajustan a
la descripcion de la clase de padres segun se define anteriormente, pero que se eliminaron de los

1

 Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4726 Page 5 of 9

Estados Unidos, asi como los derechos de los miembros de la clase de ni:fios (definidos a
continuacion) cuyos padres ban sido remoto.
Un ni:fio puede ser un miembro de la Clase del Acuerdo lnfantil si:
• Es un nifio extranjero menor de 18 afios de edad a partir de la fecha de vigencia del acuerdo, que
ingreso a los Estados Unidos en o entre los puertos de entrada designados con un padre
extranjero,
• Fue separado de su( s) padre( s),
• Ha sido o sera reunificado con su(s) padre(s) bajo la orden preliminar emitida en la Sra. L. v.
U.S. Inmigracion y Control de Aduanas, No. 18-428 (S.D. Cal. 26 de Junio de 2018), y
• Ha estado presente fisicamente continuamente en los Estados Unidos desde el 26 de Junio de
2018.
;, Que alivio proporciona el acuerdo?

Entre otras cosas, el Acuerdo de Resolucion requiere que, para los padres que inicialmente recibieron un
hallazgo de miedo creible negativo y tienen una orden final de remocion acelerada, el gobiemo de los
Estados Unidos realizara una revision de buena fe de los hallazgos de temor creibles anteriores de los
padre, 1 que incluye reunirse con un oficial de asilo para presentar informacion adicional. Para los hijos
de dichos padres a quienes se les emitio un Aviso de comparecencia (NTA) o se encuentran en proceso
de deportacion, la NTA se cancelara o el gobiemo se movera para descartar los procedimientos de
expulsion, y el nifio sera colocado en una deportacion acelerada junto con el padre. El nifio tambien sera
referido para una entrevista de temor creible si el nifio expresa temor de regresar. Si se descubre que el
padre tiene un. temor creible, a ambos padres e hijos se les otorgara una NTA para que comparezca ante
un juez de inmigracion, donde podran presentar una solicitud de asilo u otras demandas de proteccion
ante el tribunal de inmigracion. Si los padres no reciben un hallazgo de miedo creible positivo en la
revision, entonces el gobiemo de los Estados Unidos les proporcionara a sus hijos su propia entrevista
de miedo creible. Si los nifios reciben un hallazgo de temor creible positivo, ellos y sus padres recibiran
una NTA para que comparezcan ante un juez de inmigracion, donde podran presentar una solicitud de
asilo u otras demandas de proteccion ante el tribunal de inmigracion. Se aplican procedimientos
adicionales o de otro tipo cuando los padres y los nifios han sido liberados de la detencion, cuando los
padres estan sujetos a ordenes de expulsion reintegradas o definitivas, o cuando los padres ya ban sido
retirados. El Acuerdo de Conciliacion no proporciona ninglin pago monetario a los miembros de la
clase. Los padres y los nifios que entran en estas categorias deben leer el Acuerdo de Resolucion final y I
o consultar con un abogado para comprender que derechos pueden tener en virtud del Acuerdo. Si se
aprueba el Acuerdo de conciliacion, se prohibira a los miembros de la clase que busquen cualquier otra
medida cautelar, declaratoria o equitativa relacionada con la inmigracion o el asilo relacionada con las
alegaciones formuladas en estas demandas. Todos los terminos del Acuerdo propuesto estan sujetos a la
aprobacion del Tribunal en una "Audiencia de Aprobacion Final" que se explica a continuacion. Se
adjunta una copia del Acuerdo de conciliacion a este aviso.

"Miedo crefble" se refiere al proceso mediante el cual los individuos sujetos a una remoci6n acelerada pueden
buscar asilo en los Estados Unidos, en el cual un funcionario de asilo del gobiemo de los EE. UU. puede establecer un temor
creible de persecuci6n o tortura si son devueltos a su pais de origen. Si el extranjero recibe una determinaci6n de temor
creible positiva, el o ella puede presentar una solicitud de asilo ante el tribunal de inmigraci6n.

2

 Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4727 Page 6 of 9

c.

e.

If a detained, reunited MMM agreed class member child has been issued an NTA

that has been filed with an iimnigration court and the child is an arriving alien or was
initially encountered by DHS within 14 days of entry and 100 miles of the border,
DHS will file a motion to dismiss the pending Section 240 proceeding, seeking to do
so jointly with the child's immigration attorney of record, as practicable. Such a
motion shall be filed within 30 days of the Court's approval of this agreement and
shall request expedited consideration by the immigration court. Upon dismissal of the
Section 240 proceeding, ICE will initiate expedited removal proceedings under
Section 235 of the INA against the child. Where such a class member child asserts, or
has already asserted, an intention to apply for asylum or a fear of persecution or
torture, either directly or through counsel, they shall be referred to USCIS for a
credible fear determination.
d.

For Ms. L class members who are currently detained2 with their MMM agreed class
member child(ren) at an ICE FRC and are subject to reinstated orders of removal, ICE
will initiate ER proceedings under Section 235 against the minor child(ren), upon a
determination that the child was initially encountered within 14 days of entry and 100
miles of the border. During those proceedings, the child(ren) will be referred for a
credible fear determination if the child(ren) asserts, or has already asserted, a fear of
return, either directly or through counsel. The credible fear claim will then be
considered under the standards of 8 C.F.R. § 208.30, as described above. USCIS will
conduct the credible fear interview of the child(ren) in coordination with a sua sponte
review of the reasonable fear determination for the parents to determine whether
reconsideration of the negative reasonable fear determination is warranted.
USCIS will review the parent's case and the information provided and determine
whether the individual has a reasonable fear of persecution or torture. For the limited
purpose of this settlement agreement, USCIS will speak with the individual again for
additional fact-gathering and the individual may present new or additional
information at this time, with the assistance of the individual's counsel in-person
unless ICE detennines in good faith that in-person participation is impracticable or
would adversely impact facility security or operations due to facility staffing,
configuration, or access policies, in which case counsel will be permitted to
participate telephonically, provided that counsel's attendance is at no expense to the
government and does not unreasonably delay the process. In determining whether
any factual inconsistencies between the original interview and the subsequent factgathering impact the credibility of the parent, due consideration will be given to the
psychological state of the parent at the time of the initial interview. If the parent
establishes that he or she can meet the reasonable fear standard, as it is described at 8
C.F.R. § 208.3 l(c), then DHS will place the parent in withholding-only proceedings.
The parent will be permitted to participate in the child(ren)'s credible fear interview
and provide testimony on behalf of the child(ren), in addition to any testimony from
the child(ren). Counsel for the child will be permitted to attend the interview in
person unless ICE detennines in good faith that in-person participation is
impracticable or would adversely impact facility security or operations due to facility
staffing, configuration, or access, in which case counsel will be permitted to
participate telephonically, so long as it does not unreasonably delay the process and
any attorney assistance is at no expense to the government.

For Ms. L class members who have not been issued an NTA and have final ER orders
that have not been cancelled by DHS, USCIS will exercise its discretionary authority
to sua sponte conduct in good faith a de novo review of the credible fear finding of
the parent to determine if reconsideration of the negative determination is warranted.
During that review process for Ms. L class members, USCIS will review the parent's
case and the information provided and determine whether the individual has a
credible fear of persecution or torture. For the limited purpose of this settlement
agreement, USCIS will speak with the individual again for additional fact-gathering
and the individual may present new or additional infonnation at this time, with the
assistance of the individual's counsel in-person unless ICE determines in good faith
that in-person participation would adversely impact facility security or operations
due to facility staffing, configuration, or access policies, in which case counsel will
be permitted to participate telephonically, provided that counsel's attendance is at no
expense to the government and does not unreasonably delay the process. In
determining whether any factual inconsistencies between the original interview and
the subsequent fact-gathering impact the credibility of the parent, due consideration
will be given to the psychological state of the parent at the time of the initial
interview. If the parent establishes that he or she can meet the credible fear standard,
as it is described at Section 235(b)(l)(B)(v) of the INA and 8 C.F.R. § 208.30(e)(2)
and (3), then DHS will issue and subsequently file an NTA. The children will be
treated as the parent's dependents under 8 C.F.R. § 208.30(b). If the parent's credible
fear determination remains negative, USCIS will screen the child individually for
credible fear. The parent will be permitted to participate in the child(ren)'s credible
fear interview and provide testimony on behalf of the child(ren), in addition to any
testimony from the child(ren). Counsel for the child will be permitted to attend the
interview in person unless ICE detennines in good faith that in-person participation
would adversely impact facility security or operations due to facility staffing,
configuration, or access policies, in which case counsel will be permitted to
participate telephonically, so long as it does not unreasonably delay the process and
any attorney assistance is at no expense to the government.

f.

If the parent's credible fear or reasonable fear finding remains negative upon review,

USCIS will notify the parent in writing that USCIS declines to reconsider the
existing negative credible fear or reasonable fear determination. If the child receives
a separate negative credible fear determination, the child may seek review by an
immigration judge.

2
This agreement does not impact the ability of Ms. L class members with reinstated orders
of removal who are not detained to pursue any available appeal of such an order under
existing law and subject to statutory time periods.

2

 Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4728 Page 7 of 9

children covered by this plan, including statutory claims. This plan applies only to
Ms. L class members and MMM agreed class members who have been continuously
physically present in the United States since June 26, 2018, and does not set any
precedent for any additional group of aliens, and any exercise of legal authority or
discretion taken pursuant to this plan is exercised only to effectuate the
implementation of this plan in relation to this group of individuals. The Court's
approval of this agreement will resolve the pending preliminary-injunction motion in
MMM and will also lift the TRO issued in that matter. The Court will retain
jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this plan, which represents the substantive
terms for the implementation of a settlement agreement and supersedes the prior
written or oral communications between the parties regarding this plan.

Settlement Agreement
Plan to address the asylum claims of class-member parents and children who
are physically present in the United States
The government is willing to agree to the following procedures for addressing the
asylum claims of MMM agreed class members and the claims of Ms. L class
members (and Dora plaintiffs), other than those class members who agree to waive
1
these procedures (and thus to waive any further claims or relief). (In this document,
references to Ms. L class members encompass Dora plaintiffs.) Class counsel are
responsible for determining a class member's intentions related to waiver of the
procedures set forth below. Upon approval of this agreed-upon plan by the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of California, MMM agreed class members
agree to dismiss their pending litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia, and to refrain from seeking preliminary injunctive relief in their litigation
pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California; Dora
plaintiffs agree to dismiss their pending litigation in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia; and MMM agreed class members and lyfs. L class members
agree to refrain from additional litigation seeking iimnigration- or asylum-related
injunctive, declaratory, or equitable relief that arises from the facts and circumstances
set forth in the Ms. L, MMM, and Dora complaints relating to those parents and
1

1. a.

Ms. L class members and MMM agreed class members who are not currently
detained in DHS custody (and are not currently in HHS custody) and who have been
issued Notices to Appear (NTAs) will not be removed by DHS prior to issuance of a
final removal order in their resulting removal proceedings conducted under Section
240 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). If a Ms. L class member or
MMM agreed class member was released from DHS or ORR custody, is not
currently in Section 240 removal proceedings, and is not subject to a final removal
order, that individual can affinnatively apply for asylum before U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS), USCIS will adjudicate such an application regardless
of whether an unfiled NTA exists, and USCIS will follow its established procedures
concerning a parent's involvement in his or her minor child's asylum application
process. If an MMM agreed class member (whether currently detained or released)
received a final removal order in Section 240 removal proceedings prior to
reunification, DHS and HHS will work in good faith with MMM counsel to identify
such children within 15 days of approval of this agreement, and DHS will join in a
motion to reopen those proceedings ifrequested by the MMM agreed class member
no later than 45 days from approval of this agreement. MMM agreed class members
who have not been reunified with their parent(s) as of the effective date of this
agreement will be afforded existing procedures for unaccompanied alien children
pursuant to governing stah1tes and regulations, including but not limited to Section
240 removal proceedings, unless and until they are reunified with a parent, in which
case the procedures described below will apply.

The classes of individuals to whom this plan relates include:

Ms. L Class Members and Dora Plaintiffs: All adult alien parents who entered the

United States at or between designated ports of entry with their child(ren), and who, on or
before the effective date of this agreement: (1) were detained in immigration custody by
the DHS; (2) have a child who was or is separated from them by DHS and, on or after June
26, 2018, was housed in ORR custody, ORR foster care, or DHS custody, absent a
determination that the parent is unfit or presents a danger to the child; and (3) have been
(and whose child(ren) have been) continuously physically present within the United States
since June 26, 2018, whether in detention or released. The class does not include alien
parents with criminal histories or a communicable disease, or those encountered in the
interior of the United States.
M.M.M. Agreed Class Members: All alien children who are under the age of 18 on the
effective date of this agreement who: (I) entered the United States at or between
designated ports of entry with an alien parent, and who were separated from their parents,
on or before the effective date of this settlement agreement; (2) have been or will be
reunified with that parent pursuant to the preliminary injunction issued by the Court in Ms.
L v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Eriforcement, No. 18-428 (S.D. Cal. June 26, 2018);
and (3) have been continuously physically present in the United States since June 26,
2018.

b.

All references to a "class" or "class member" in this document refer to the classes
described above, as well as alien parents who are not part of the Ms. L class due to
criminal history or communicable disease, but who the Court has ordered must be
reunified.

1

If a detained, reunited MMM agreed class member child has been served with an
NTA, but the NTA has not been filed with an immigration court, DHS will exercise
its discretion under 8 C.F.R. § 239.2(a) to cancel the NTA within 15 days of the
Court's approval of this agreement. For such a child who either had an NTA
cancelled in this way, or who has never been served with an NTA, if the child is an
arriving alien or was initially encountered by DHS within 14 days of entry and 100
miles of the border, ICE will then initiate expedited removal (ER) proceedings under
Section 235 of the INA against the child. Where such a class member child asserts, or
has already asserted, an intention to apply for asylum or a fear of persecution or
torture, either directly or through counsel, they shall be referred to USCIS for a
credible fear determination.

 Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4729 Page 8 of 9

the Court, including statutory claims. This agreement does not affect the right of Ms.
L class members to seek reunification under the June 26, 2018 preliminary injunction
in Ms. L.
The return of removed parents to the United States4

The government does not intend to, nor does it agree to, return any removed parent to
the United States or to facilitate any return of such removed parents. The classes
agree not to pursue any right or claim of removed parents to return to the United
States other than as specifically set forth in this paragraph. Plaintiffs' counsel may
raise with the government individual cases in which plaintiffs' counsel believes the
return of a particular removed Ms. L class member may be warranted. Plaintiffs'
counsel represent that they believe that such individual cases will be rare and unusual
and that they have no basis for believing that such individual cases will be other than
rare and unusual. Plaintiffs' counsel agree to present any such cases, including all
evidence they would like considered by the government within 30 days of the
approval of this agreement. In light of plaintiffs' counsel's representation that such
cases will be rare and unusual, Defendants agree to provide a reply to any case
presented by Plaintiffs within 30 days of receiving Plaintiffs' request to consider the
case. Except as specifically set forth herein, the classes agree that existing law,
existing procedures, and the Court-approved reunification plan address all interests
that such parents or their children may have.
With respect to MMM agreed class members who seek asylum and who have
removed parents, the government agrees not to oppose requests that the removed
parent provide testimony or evidence telephonically or in writing in the child's
asylum or removal proceedings and that ICE attorneys appearing in immigration
court (1) will not object to the admission of documentary evidence (such as
photocopied, scanned, or faxed documents) provided by the removed parent on the
grounds that such documentary evidence does not bear an original signature or is not
an original copy (ICE reserves the right to object based on other grounds), and (2)
will not object to telephonic participation by the parent in the MMM agreed class
member's Section 240 removal proceedings provided that the alien (and his or her
legal representative, if applicable) make appropriate motions to the immigration
judge to permit telephonic testimony in advance of any merits hearing, that the alien
is responsible for providing accurate contact information to permit the immigration
judge to make contact with the parent, and that the parent's unavailability and faulty
connections or other technological impediments may not serve as the basis for
delaying scheduled hearings. Class members, however, recognize that ICE has no
control over the technology or logistics of the Executive Office for Immigration
Review.

4

For this section of this agreement, the classes are the same as in footnote 1 above except
that the requirements of continuous physical presence in the United States do not apply to
this section of the agreement, since this section addresses removed parents.

4

 Case 3:18-cv-00428-DMS-MDD Document 304 Filed 11/06/18 PageID.4730 Page 9 of 9

g.

2.

3.
4.

5.
6.

7.

For purposes of the reviews and interviews of detained parents and/or children
described in this proposal, the government shall provide the parent and/or child with
the orientation that is nonnally provided for credible fear interviews, and shall
provide at least 5 days' notice of such orientation. Notice of the orientation shall be
provided no later than 3 days following the parent and/or child's execution of a
document reflecting his or her decision pursuant to paragraph 8 of this agreement,
and the notice shall state the purpose of the notice (orientation for an interview or
review) and the date, time, and location of the orientation. Such reviews and
interviews will be conducted at least 48 hours after the orientation, with due
consideration given to any reasonable requests to continue the interview. The notice
and time periods described in this paragraph will not apply if a parent affirmatively
requests, in writing, that the review or interview take place on an expedited basis.

8.

If a Ms. L. class member who is currently detained3 in an ICE FRC with his or her
MMM agreed class member child is subject to a final removal order issued in
proceedings conducted under Section 240 (other than a reinstated order) and the child is
an arriving alien or was initially encountered by DHS within 14 days of entry and I 00
miles of the border, ICE would initiate ER proceedings under Section 235 against the
child within 7 days of the Court's approval of this agreement, and refer the child for a
credible fear interview. While the final order parent would not be a party to the child's
credible fear adjudication, the parent would be available to consult with and assist the
child in the course of that process. The parent would be permitted to participate in the
child(ren)'s credible fear interview and provide testimony on behalf of the child(ren),
in addition to any testimony from the child(ren). Counsel for the child will be
pennitted to attend the interview in person, so long as it does not unreasonably delay
the process and any attorney assistance is at no expense to the government, and the
timing of the interview will be in accordance with Paragraph 1.g. above. If the child
establishes a credible fear of persecution or torture, USCIS will place the child in
Section 240 removal proceedings, and ICE will move for reopening of the parent's
prior removal proceedings and consolidation of the parent's case with the child's
before the immigration court. If the child does not establish credible fear of
persecution or torture, the removal orders may immediately be executed.

7.

Detention and custody decisions for aliens covered by this plan will be made
consistent with DHS's authorities under Sections 235, 236, and 241, and the Order
Granting Joint Motion Regarding Scope Of The Court's Preliminary Injunction in
Ms. L. v. ICE, No. 18-428 (S.D. Cal.) (Aug. 16, 2018) (ECF 192) (recognizing that
class members may be required to choose whether to waive their own right not to be
separated from their minor child(ren) or to waive their child(ren)'s right under the
Flores Settlement Agreement to be released, including the rights with regard to
placement in the least restrictive setting appropriate to the minor's age and special
needs, and the right to release or placement in a "licensed program.").

8.

Ms. L counsel, MMM counsel, or Dora counsel may identify class members who
wish to waive the procedures described herein and be promptly removed to their
country of origin. Ms. L counsel, MMM counsel, and Dora counsel will promptly
develop a process for obtaining and documenting such a choice through a knowing
and voluntary waiver. Defendants will not engage with class members on such
matters, but will seek to effectuate such waiver decisions when communicated and
documented by Ms. L counsel, MMM counsel, or Dora counsel. Class members
may either pursue the relief described in this agreement or elect prompt removal, but
may not pursue any other immigration- or asylum-related injunctive, declaratory, or
equitable relief based on the allegations or claims made in any of the Ms. L, MMM,
or Dora complaints filed in any court accruing as of the date this plan is approved by

In the case of a parent and child(ren) both in ER proceedings under the process
described above, if either the parent or the child establishes a credible fear of
persecution or torture, USCIS will issue NTAs to both parent and child and place the
family in Section 240 removal proceedings. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.30(f) (positive
credible fear finding made by USCIS), 1208.30(g)(2)(iv)(B) (positive credible fear
finding made by immigration judge).
In the case of a parent and child(ren) both in ER proceedings under the process
described above, if none of the family members establish credible fear of persecution
or torture (and in the case of a child who seeks review of the credible fear finding by
an immigration judge, such finding is upheld by an immigration judge), the ER
orders may immediately be executed.
In the case of a parent who is subject to a reinstated order of removal, if the
child(ren) establishes credible fear and the parent does not establish a reasonable
fear, the child(ren) would be placed in Section 240 removal proceedings and the
parent would at that time be subject to continued detention or release, in DHS's
discretion, consistent with paragraph 7 below. DHS will not remove a Ms. L class
member who received a negative reasonable fear finding while his or her MMM
agreed class member child goes through the credible fear process and, if applicable,
Section 240 removal proceedings. Plaintiffs concede, however, that removal of any
Ms. L class member with a reinstated removal order under this agreement is
significantly likely to occur in the reasonably foreseeable future and that, if a parent
initiates legal proceedings challenging their continued detention, DHS may
immediately proceed with that Ms. L class member's removal, regardless of any
injunctive orders issued in Ms.Land MMM, provided that DHS gives the parent at
least 7 days' advance notice to the parent that he or she will be removed.
In the case of a parent who is subject to a reinstated order of removal, if the
child(ren) establish credible fear and the parent establishes a reasonable fear, the
child(ren) would be issued NTAs and placed in Section 240 removal proceedings,
and the parent would be referred for withholding-only proceedings pursuant to 8
C.F.R. §§ 1208.2(c)(2) and 1208.3l(e).

3

This agreement does not impact the ability of Ms. L class members with final removal
orders issued in Section 240 removal proceedings, other than a reinstated order of
removal, and who are not detained, to pursue individual appeals of such orders under
existing law and subject to statutory time periods for challenging any such order.

3