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)
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?