Lakshmanan et al v. Hazuda et al

Filing 11

ORDER denying plaintiff's 2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order; granting defendants' 9 Motion to Dismiss; complaint is dismissed in its entirety, signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (SWT)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9
10
11

PRADEEP LAKSHMANAN, and
JAYASHREE PRADEEP,

12

Plaintiffs,

13
14

Case No. C17-1399RSL
ORDER GRANTING
MOTION TO DISMISS

v.
GREGORY A. RICHARDSON, et al.

15

Defendants.

16
17

This matter comes before the Court on defendants’ unopposed “Motion to Dismiss

18 Plaintiffs’ Complaint for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.” Dkt. # 9. On September 15, 2017,
19 plaintiffs filed a complaint and motion for a temporary restraining order based on the disputed
20 revocation of their visa petitions and other immigration-related authorizations. In the intervening
21 time, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reopened and approved the disputed
22 petitions and authorizations. See Dkt. # 9-1. Defendants then filed the instant motion to dismiss
23 because USCIS’s administrative actions rendered plaintiffs’ complaint moot, Dkt. # 9, which
24 plaintiffs do not oppose, Dkt. # 10.
25

Accordingly, defendants’ motion, Dkt. # 9, is GRANTED, plaintiffs’ pending motion for

26 a temporary restraining order, Dkt. # 2, is DENIED, and the complaint is dismissed in its
27 entirety.
28

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS - 1

1

DATED this 7th day of November, 2017.

2
3
4

A
Robert S. Lasnik

5

United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS - 2