Defendants filed a brief in response to the Court's order.
Plaintiffs responded to the Court's order regarding contempt sanctions and sovereign immunity.
Plaintiffs moved for reconsideration of the Court's Order regarding sanctions.
Defendants filed an Opposition to the Plaintiffs' Motion for Partial Reconsideration.
Plaintiffs' filed a Motion for Partial Reconsideration.
The Department of Education filed a notice to withdrawal its motion to reconsider sanctions.
The Department of Education filed a motion for partial reconsideration for the Court's sanctions.
The court found the Defendants in civil contempt and ordered sanctions of $100,000.
Plaintiffs filed a brief in support of contempt and sanctions.
The Government filed a response to the order issued on October 8, 2019
The Department filed a report with the Court detailing its non-compliance with the Court’s prior preliminary injunction order.
Plaintiffs filed their reply in support of their motion to lift the stay of proceedings and to enforce the preliminary injunction.
The Department of Education filed an opposition to the Plaintiffs Motion to Lift Stay of Proceedings and Enforce Injunction.
Plaintiffs filed a motion asking the court to lift the stay of proceedings it entered in August 2018 and to allow the case to move forward. Plaintiffs also filed a motion to enforce the preliminary injunction to address the Department’s recent violations of that injunction.
The Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, permitting Plaintiffs to pursue the case as a class action.
Plaintiffs responded to the Department’s objection related to their proposed class definition and explained to the Court why its proposal is appropriate.
The Department of Education notified the Court that it did not oppose certification of a class, subject to an objection related to Plaintiffs’ proposed class definition.
The Department of Education filed its reply brief in support of its motion to stay proceedings pending appeal. The Department continues to urge the court to put all proceedings in the district court on hold until the Ninth Circuit reviews the Court’s preliminary injunction decision.
The Court has continued all hearing dates until it decides Defendants’ motion to stay the district court proceedings pending appeal.
Plaintiffs contend that the parties should continue litigating the case during the pendency of the Ninth Circuit appeal.
The Department file a Motion for a Stay Pending Appeal. The Department seeks to halt all district court proceedings pending the Ninth Circuit’s decision on the preliminary injunction appeal.
The Department filed a reply to the Plaintiffs' response to the motion for clarification.
Plaintiffs filed their response to the Department’s Motion for Clarification.
The Department filed a motion seeking clarification on the Court’s preliminary injunction regarding putative class members who have not yet submitted a borrower defense attestation form.
January 2017 Department of Education Memorandum on Borrower Defense for borrowers who attended American Career Institute’s Massachusetts campuses.
The Court advised "the parties that any issues regarding attorney-client privilege will be referred to another Magistrate Judge for determinations" and ordered the parties to "meet and confer on how best to brief this issue."
The Court modified the previous Order granting in part and denying in part Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction.
On June 11, 2018, the Court held a case management conference at which it indicated that it intended to clarify the preliminary injunction it issued on May 25, 2018, see ECF No. 60 (the "May 25 PI Order") and, to that end, ordered the parties to "submit a joint document with proposed...
Evidence that shows the Department of Education can determine who is a member of the putative class through its own documents and data systems.
The Department of Education filed a brief in response to the Court's May 25, 2018 order.
Plaintiffs' filed a Supplemental Memorandum in response to the Court's May 25th Order.
The Court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
Plaintiffs' filed a Reply in Support of their Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
On April 19, 2018, Plaintiffs' filed a Motion for Class Certification.
This brief is submitted by Public Law Center, Public Counsel and National Consumer Law Center, non-profit legal aid and advocacy organizations as Amici Curiae. Amici work with student loan borrowers who have been harmed by predatory schools...
Pursuant to the Court's April 3 Order Regarding Amicus Briefing, prospective amicus curiae The Debt Collective respectfully request leave to file an amicus brief in this matter...
The Attorneys General of California, Illinois, Maryland, and Massachusetts ("Amici States") were instrumental in securing the widespread borrower-defense relief at issue in this case...
The Department of Education's exhibits detailing its methodology and justification of a rule providing for partial denials of borrower defense applications.
The Department of Education filed an opposition to borrowers' motion for a preliminary injunction.
The court issued an order setting forth the procedures for filing an amicus brief regarding Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction.
Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Motion and Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
Plaintiffs filed an Amended Class Action Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief.
In support of their Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, Plaintiffs submitted the attached, substantial evidence showing their entitlement to the requested relief.
Notice of Appeal
The government indicates that it is appealing the Preliminary Injunction entered against it.
The Department submitted answers to the Ninth Circuit relating to the Court’s mediation program.
Motion for Extension of Time on Opening Brief
The Department asked for a two week extension to file its opening brief in this appeal.
Department of Education’s Opening Brief
The Department filed its opening brief in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the District Court’s preliminary injunction order.
Department of Education’s Excerpt of Records
Alongside its brief, the Department filed “excerpts of the record” in its appeal of the District Court’s preliminary injunction order.
Plaintiffs’ Responsive Brief
Plaintiffs filed their responsive brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In it, they defend the District Court’s decision to enjoin the Department’s use of the Average Earnings Rule to partially deny Corinthian Students’ borrower defense assertions.
Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Excerpts of Record
With their responsive brief, Plaintiffs filed supplemental excerpts of record with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiffs provided the appellate court with additional evidence that was presented to the District Court and that justified the entry of the preliminary injunction.
Debt Collective Amicus
The Debt Collective filed a brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as amicus curiae in support of affirming the District Court’s preliminary injunction order.
A coalition of 8 states (California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, New York, and Washington) filed a brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as amicus curiae in support of affirming the District Court’s preliminary injunction order.
Legal Aid Amicus
The Public Law Center and Public Counsel filed a brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as amicus curiae in support of affirming the District Court’s preliminary injunction order.
Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Amicus
The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights filed a brief with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as amicus curiae in support of affirming the District Court’s preliminary injunction order.
The Department of Education filed a reply in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It argues in support of its appeal against the District Court’s entry of a preliminary injunction against it.
Court Order Requesting Supplemental Briefing
Following oral argument, on February 19, 2019, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the parties to submit supplemental briefs addressing whether the Department of Education’s Average Earnings Rule was unlawful because it was arbitrary and capricious.
Plaintiffs' Supplemental Brief
In response to the Court’s order, Plaintiffs submitted a supplemental brief urging the Court to affirm the District Court’s injunction because the Department’s Average Earnings Rule is arbitrary and capricious.
Department of Education's Supplemental Brief
In response to the Court’s order, the Department of Education filed its supplemental brief addressing whether its conduct was arbitrary and capricious.