Shuxian Li et al v. Dir LA Asylum Ofc et al
Filing
17
ORDER DISMISSING CASE by Judge Percy Anderson. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The instant action shall be dismissed without prejudice; (See document for further details). (Case Terminated. Made JS-6.) (aco)
JS-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
11
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
WESTERN DIVISON
12
13
SHUXIAN LI, JINGHUI ZHOU,
14 XIAOBING ZHOU, ANDY ZHEN
15 BANG ZHOU LI,
16
17
Plaintiffs,
v.
18
DIRECTOR OF THE LOS ANGELES
19 ASYLUM OFFICE ET AL,
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendants.
No. 2:23-cv-08548-PA (RAO)
ORDER DISMISSING CASE
Honorable Percy Anderson
United States District Judge
1
2
Having read and considered the Joint Stipulation to Dismiss the Case submitted by
the parties, and finding good cause therefor,
3
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4
1.
The instant action shall be dismissed without prejudice;
5
2.
USCIS shall interview Plaintiffs Shuxian Li, Jinghui Zhou, Xiaobing Zhou
6
and Andy Zhen Bang Zhou Li on November 7, 2024, at 10:30 a.m., at the
7
Los Angeles Asylum Office in Tustin, California. USCIS intends to conduct
8
the interview on the date set, however, the parties understand that due to
9
unexpected staffing limitations or other unforeseen circumstances that may
10
arise, USCIS reserves its right to cancel and reschedule the interview.
11
Should rescheduling be necessary, the interview will be rescheduled within
12
four (4) weeks of the original interview date, absent unforeseen or
13
exceptional circumstances;
14
3.
unforeseen or exceptional circumstances;
15
16
Plaintiffs agree to attend the interview on the date listed above, absent
4.
If needed, Plaintiffs agree to only make one (1) interview reschedule request
17
and to notify the Los Angeles Asylum Office of the reschedule request, in
18
writing, prior to the scheduled interview date. Plaintiffs may email the
19
reschedule request to LosAngelesAsylum@uscis.dhs.gov;
20
5.
If multiple reschedule requests are made by Plaintiffs, USCIS may place the
21
asylum application back into the Los Angeles Asylum Office’s general
22
interview scheduling priorities. See
23
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-
24
asylum/asylum/affirmative-asylum-interview-scheduling;
25
6.
Plaintiffs understand that additional interview(s) may be required by USCIS
26
as part of the asylum interview process and the adjudication of the
27
application;
28
7.
USCIS agrees to diligently work towards completing adjudication of the
1
1
asylum application within 120 days of completion of Plaintiffs’ asylum
2
interview, absent unforeseen or exceptional circumstances that would
3
require additional time to complete adjudication;
4
8.
In the event that USCIS does not complete adjudication of the asylum
5
application within 120 days of the completion of the asylum interview,
6
Plaintiffs may refile this action;
7
9.
Plaintiffs agree to submit all supplemental documents and evidence, if any,
8
to USCIS prior to the agreed upon scheduled interview based on the
9
following timelines. Plaintiffs may email any supplemental documents to
10
LosAngelesAsylum@uscis.dhs.gov at least seven (7) calendar days before
11
the interview. Alternatively, Plaintiffs may mail the supplemental
12
documents to the Los Angeles Asylum Office, P.O. Box 2003, Tustin, CA
13
92781-2003, postmarked no later than ten (10) calendar days prior to the
14
scheduled asylum interview. Plaintiffs recognize that failure to submit these
15
documents in a timely manner may result in the interview being rescheduled
16
at no fault of USCIS;
17
18
10.
Each party agrees to bear it’s the party’s own litigation costs, expenses, and
attorney fees.
19
20
Dated: 1RYHPEHU
21
22
23
____________________________________
______________________________________
PERCY
PER
RCY ANDERSON
UNITED STATES
ST
TATES DISTRICT JUDGE
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?