Cristian Doe; Diana Doe v. ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of Homeland Security;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CRISTIAN DOE; DIANA DOE,
Petitioners-Appellees,
v.
ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Secretary of
Homeland Security; et al.,
Respondents-Appellants.
No. 20-55279
D.C. No.
3:19-cv-02119-DMS-AGS
ORDER
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California
Dana M. Sabraw, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted November 13, 2020
Submission Vacated December 15, 2020
Resubmitted July 16, 2021
Pasadena, California
Before: CHRISTEN and WATFORD, Circuit Judges, and ROSENTHAL,* District
Judge.
On December 15, 2020, we vacated submission of this appeal pending the
Supreme Court’s disposition of Mayorkas v. Innovation Law Lab, No. 19-1212, an
FILED
JUL 19 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* The Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal, Chief United States District Judge
for the Southern District of Texas, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

appeal that challenged the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). The Department
of Homeland Security terminated the MPP on June 1, 2021. Memorandum from
Alejandro N. Mayorkas regarding Termination of the Migrant Protection Protocols
Program 7 (June 1, 2021), available at https://go.usa.gov/x6s7E. On June 21,
2021, the Supreme Court issued an order vacating the judgment in Innovation Law
Lab and remanding to the Ninth Circuit with instructions to direct the district court
to vacate as moot the April 8, 2019 preliminary injunction that enjoined the
Department of Homeland Security from implementing the MPP.
This appeal before us challenges a discrete procedural sub-issue of the now-
terminated MPP. Because the Supreme Court decided that a challenge to the MPP
as a whole was moot after the government terminated the program, we conclude
that the narrower question presented in this appeal is also moot. Accordingly, we
remand this case to the district court with instructions to vacate the January 14,
2020 order granting the motion for classwide preliminary injunction as moot. See
United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36 (1950).1
REMANDED
1 Appellees’ motion to file a supplemental brief, ECF 30, is DENIED as
moot. Appellees’ motion to supplement the record on appeal, ECF 55, is
GRANTED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --