CARREIRA v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

Filing 6

Joint MOTION to Hold in Abeyance by UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Go, Samuel)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CHRISTINA CARRIERA, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-02406-APM JOINT MOTION TO HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE COME NOW Plaintiff and Defendant (“parties”), by and through their undersigned counsel, and hereby move the Court for an Order holding the instant matter in abeyance for one-hundred twenty (120) days, to April 8, 2019, at which time the parties will file a joint status report with the Court or dismiss the litigation, as appropriate. As grounds for this motion, the parties state as follows: 1. On October 21, 2018, Plaintiff filed her Complaint in this matter. ECF No. 1. On November 1, 2018, Plaintiff served the Complaint on Defendant. In accordance with the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(2), Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s Complaint is due on or around December 31, 2018. 2. On November 28, 2018 and November 30, 2018, the parties conferred regarding the instant matter. During these discussions, Defendant’s counsel indicated to Plaintiff’s counsel that USCIS was amenable to reopening its August 30, 2018, decision denying Plaintiff’s May 21, 2018 visa petition, issuing a Notice of Intent to Deny (“NOID”) to Plaintiff, and giving Plaintiff the opportunity to respond to the NOID. 1 3. Pursuant to these discussions, the parties agreed to hold the instant matter in abeyance for one-hundred twenty (120) days, to April 8, 2019, at which time the parties will file a joint status report with the Court or dismiss the litigation, as appropriate. While the matter is held in abeyance, the parties intend for the following process to occur: a. Defendant will issue the NOID within thirty (30) days of entry of the Court’s Order granting the instant motion; b. Plaintiff will mail her response to the NOID within thirty (30) days of receiving the NOID, and Plaintiff’s counsel will provide a tracking number to Defendant’s counsel (Samuel Go) for Plaintiff’s response to the NOID; and c. Defendant will issue a decision within sixty (60) days of receiving Plaintiff’s response to the NOID. 4. Pursuant to LCvR 7(m), counsel for Defendant, Samuel Go, met and conferred with counsel for Plaintiff, Michael Piston, on November 28, 2018 and November 30, 2018. WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully move this Court to enter an Order holding the instant matter in abeyance for one-hundred twenty (120) days. DATED: December 4, 2018 Respectfully submitted, JOSEPH H. HUNT Assistant Attorney General WILLIAM C. PEACHEY Director GLENN M. GIRDHARRY Assistant Director By: s/ Michael E. Piston (with permission) MICHAEL E. PISTON LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL E. PISTON 225 Broadway Suite 307 New York, NY 10007 Tel: (646) 845-9895 Fax: (206) 770-6350 Email: michaelpiston4@gmail.com By: s/ Samuel P. Go SAMUEL P. GO Senior Litigation Counsel United States Department of Justice Civil Division Office of Immigration Litigation District Court Section P.O. Box 868, Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Tel: (202) 353-9923 Fax: (202) 305-7000 Email: samuel.go@usdoj.gov Attorney for Plaintiff 2 Attorneys for Defendant 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on December 4, 2018, I electronically filed the foregoing JOINT MOTION TO HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE with the Clerk of Court by using the CM/ECF system, which will provide electronic notice and an electronic link to this document to the following attorney of record: Michael E. Piston LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL E. PISTON 225 Broadway Suite 307 New York, NY 10007 Tel: (646) 845-9895 Fax: (206) 770-6350 Email: michaelpiston4@gmail.com DATED: December 4, 2018 s/ Samuel P. Go SAMUEL P. GO Senior Litigation Counsel United States Department of Justice Civil Division

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?