Kulmedov et al v. Mayorkas et al

Filing 8

ORDER granting Parties' 7 Stipulated MOTION to Hold Case in Abeyance. The case is held in abeyance until 4/12/2024. The parties shall submit a joint status report on or before 4/12/2024. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (SB)

Download PDF
1 District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7 8 No. 2:23-cv-1603-RSM GULMET KULMEDOV, et al., 9 STIPULATED MOTION TO HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE AND ORDER Plaintiffs, 10 v. Noted for Consideration: November 7, 2023 11 ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, et al., 12 Defendants. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Plaintiffs brought this litigation pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act seeking, inter alia, to compel the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) adjudicate their Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal. Defendants’ response to the Complaint is currently due on December 22, 2023. The parties are currently working towards a resolution to this litigation. For good cause, the parties request that the Court hold the case in abeyance until April 12, 2024. Courts have “broad discretion” to stay proceedings. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997). “[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for 24 STIPULATED MOTION FOR ABEYANCE (23-cv-1603-RSM) -1 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 553-7970 1 counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936); see also Fed. R. Civ. 2 P. 1. 3 With additional time, this case may be resolved without the need of further judicial 4 intervention. USCIS has scheduled Plaintiffs’ asylum interview for December 14, 2023. Plaintiffs 5 will submit all supplemental documents and evidence, if any, to USCIS seven to ten days prior to 6 the interview date. 7 application. Once the application is adjudicated, Plaintiffs will dismiss the case with each party to 8 bear their own litigation costs and attorneys’ fees. Accordingly, the parties request this abeyance 9 to allow USCIS to conduct Plaintiffs’ asylum interview and then process their asylum application. 10 As additional time is necessary for this to occur, the parties request that the Court hold the 11 case in abeyance until April 12, 2024. The parties will submit a joint status report on or before 12 April 12, 2024. 13 Dated: November 7, 2023 After the interview, USCIS will need time to adjudicate their asylum Respectfully submitted, 14 TESSA M. GORMAN Acting United States Attorney 15 s/Michelle R. Lambert MICHELLE R. LAMBERT, NYS #4666657 Assistant United States Attorney 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700 Tacoma, Washington 98402 Phone: 206-428-3824 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants 16 17 18 19 20 I certify that this memorandum contains 282words, in compliance with the Local Civil Rules. 21 22 s/ Bart Klein BART KLEIN WSBA#10909 Law Officesof Bart Klein 605 First Avenue, Ste. 500 23 24 STIPULATED MOTION FOR ABEYANCE (23-cv-1603-RSM) -2 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 553-7970 1 Seattle, Washington 98104 Phone: 206-624-3787 Email: bart.klein@bartklein.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 STIPULATED MOTION FOR ABEYANCE (23-cv-1603-RSM) -3 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 553-7970 1 2 ORDER The case is held in abeyance until April 12, 2024. The parties shall submit a joint status report on or before April 12, 2024. It is so ORDERED. 3 4 DATED this 13th day of November, 2023. 5 A 6 7 RICARDO S. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 STIPULATED MOTION FOR ABEYANCE (23-cv-1603-RSM) -4 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 (206) 553-7970

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?