Saucedo-Carrillo, et al. v. United States, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division (N.D. Ohio; 3:12-cv-2571)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (Sixth Cir. 13-4502)
In a related case to Muñiz v. United States Border Patrol, ABLE filed a Federal Tort Claims Action on behalf of a mother and daughter who allege that a Border Patrol Agent profiled them for arrest because they are Hispanic. The Plaintiffs were purchasing gasoline at a gas station in Norwalk, Ohio, when an Agent blocked their vehicle and started questioning them. This lawsuit against the United States alleges the Border Patrol Agent committed the Ohio torts of assault, false imprisonment, deprivation of civil rights through ethnic intimidation, and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. In 2013, the federal district court judge granted a motion for summary judgment filed by the United States. The Sixth Circuit, in a decision on August 13, 2015, affirmed the grant of summary judgment 2 -1, with the dissenting opinion stating that a factfinder could find that the Plaintiffs were falsely imprisoned before the Border Patrol Agent developed probable cause for an arrest.
On a related note, the Plaintiffs had been placed in removal proceedings. The Immigration Judge found that their Fourth Amendment rights were violated by the conduct of the Border Patrol Agent, but the violation was not egregious. The removal cases were administratively closed.
- Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgement
- Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment
- Grant of Summary Judgment to Defendant – District Court
- Plaintiffs’ Brief on Appeal
- Defendant’s Brief on Appeal
- Affirmance of District Court decision – Fifth Circuit