Andrew v. Mayorkas

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington
DecidedJanuary 29, 2025
Docket2:24-cv-01375
StatusUnknown

This text of Andrew v. Mayorkas (Andrew v. Mayorkas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Andrew v. Mayorkas, (W.D. Wash. 2025).

Opinion

1 District Judge James L. Robart 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 RWANGOKO ANDREW, Case No. 2:24-cv-01375-JLR 10 Plaintiff, STIPULATED MOTION TO 11 v. HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 12 KRISTI NOEM, et al.,1 Noted for Consideration: 13 Defendants. January 29, 2025 14 15 Plaintiff Rwangoko Andrew and Defendants, through their respective counsel, pursuant 16 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6 and Local Rules 10(g) and 16, and hereby jointly stipulate 17 and move for to stay these proceedings until May 23, 2025. Plaintiff brings this lawsuit pursuant 18 to the Administrative Procedure Act and the Mandamus Act to compel the U.S. Citizenship and 19 Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate the Forms I-730, Refugee/Asylee Relative 20 Petitions, that Plaintiff filed on behalf of his wife and children in December 2018. Defendants’ 21 22 23 1 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), Defendants substitute Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem for Alejandro Mayorkas, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) Acting Director Jennifer 24 B.Higgins for Ur M. Jaddou. 1 response to the Complaint is due on February 25, 2025. For good cause, the parties request that 2 this case be held in abeyance through May 23, 2025. 3 Courts have “broad discretion” to stay proceedings. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 4 (1997). “[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to

5 control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for 6 counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936); see also Fed. R. Civ. 7 P. 1. 8 USCIS Nairobi Field Office approved Plaintiff’s Form I-730 petitions on January 3, 9 2025. On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order (“EO”) entitled 10 “Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program.” Presidential Actions, Executive 11 Order, Jan. 20, 2025, Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program, available at 12 https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/realigning-the-united-states-refugee- 13 admissions-program/ (last visited Jan. 28, 2025). Section 3(a) of the EO suspended entry of

14 refugees into the United States through the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (“USRAP”) as of 15 January 27, 2025. Section 3(b) of the EO also suspended “decisions on applications for refugee 16 status” by the Department of Homeland Security as of its issuance. This means that decisions on 17 Form I-590, Registration for Classification as a Refugee, and Form I-730, Asylee/Refugee 18 Relative Petitions filed by principal refugees, are suspended. 19 Section 4 of the EO indicates that within 90 days of the EO’s issuance, the Secretary of 20 Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State (“the Secretaries”), shall submit a 21 report to the President through the Homeland Security Advisor regarding whether resumption of 22 entry of refugees into the United States under the USRAP would be in the interests of the United 23 States. The Secretaries shall submit further reports every 90 days thereafter for the duration of

24 1 the USRAP suspension. The suspension will remain in place until President Trump determines 2 that resumption of the USRAP is in the interests of the United States. 3 Once the USRAP resumes, USCIS Nairobi Field Office will work to coordinate and 4 complete any remaining processing steps that may be required, including but not limited to

5 coordinating with USRAP partners regarding medical examinations and sponsorship assurances, 6 and completion of any final background checks and eligibility determinations. Completion of 7 required case processing, as well as a beneficiary’s ability to travel to and enter the United 8 States, may be contingent on any updates to, or forthcoming guidance on, the newly issued 9 Executive Orders. 10 Additionally, separate from this litigation, Plaintiff’s youngest child, who resides in 11 Kenya with the beneficiaries, has an approved Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, and is in 12 the process of applying for an immigrant visa through the State Department at the U.S. Embassy 13 in Nairobi. The beneficiaries want to travel to the United States with the child.

14 Because of the EO, the remaining required steps on the Forms I-730 processing, and to 15 allow time to synchronize travel for Plaintiff’s youngest child going through immigrant visa 16 processing, the parties agree and jointly request that this case be held in abeyance until May 23, 17 2025, and order the parties to file a joint status report on or before May 23, 2025. The parties 18 further request that the Order Regarding Initial Disclosures, Joint Status Report, and Early 19 Settlement (Dkt. No. 16) be vacated. 20 // 21 22 // 23

24 // 1 DATED this 29th day of January, 2025. 2 Respectfully submitted, 3 TESSA M. GORMAN SUMMIT LAW GROUP, PLLC United States Attorney 4 s/ Michelle R. Lambert s/ Diana Siri Breaux 5 MICHELLE R. LAMBERT, NYS #4666657 Diana Siri Breaux, WSBA #46112 Assistant United States Attorney dianab@summitlaw.com 6 United States Attorney’s Office 315 Fifth Avenue S., Suite 1000 Western District of Washington Seattle, WA 98104 7 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700 Telephone: 206-676-7000 Tacoma, Washington 98402 8 Phone: (253) 428-3824 PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER Fax: (253) 428-3826 LLP 9 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov s/ Steven A. Zalesin 10 Attorneys for Defendants STEVEN A. ZALESIN (Pro Hac Vice) sazalesin@pbwt.com 11 I certify that this memorandum contains 631 words, in compliance with the Local Civil Rules. s/ Stephanie Sofer 12 STEPHANIE SOFER (Pro Hac Vice) ssofer@pbwt.com 13 s/ Emma Guido Brill 14 EMMA GUIDO BRILL (Pro Hac Vice) ebrill@pbwt.com 15 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 16 Telephone: 212.336.2000 17 Attorneys for Plaintiff 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 The parties having so stipulated, the above is SO ORDERED. The parties shall file a 3 joint status report on or before May 23, 2025. The Order Regarding Initial Disclosures, Joint 4 Status Report, and Early Settlement (Dkt. No. 16) is vacated.

5 6 DATED this 29th day of January, 2025. 7 A 8 JAMES L. ROBART 9 United States District Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Landis v. North American Co.
299 U.S. 248 (Supreme Court, 1936)
Clinton v. Jones
520 U.S. 681 (Supreme Court, 1997)
People v. Platt
7 P. 1 (California Supreme Court, 1885)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Andrew v. Mayorkas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andrew-v-mayorkas-wawd-2025.