Henry v. Secretary, Department of Homeland Security

CourtDistrict Court, M.D. Florida
DecidedDecember 20, 2024
Docket6:24-cv-01018
StatusUnknown

This text of Henry v. Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (Henry v. Secretary, Department of Homeland Security) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Henry v. Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, (M.D. Fla. 2024).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

DAVID GEORGE HENRY,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 6:24-cv-1018-JSS-EJK

U.S. CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION SERVICES and SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,

Defendants. ___________________________________/ ORDER Plaintiff moves to stay this case pending United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) adjudication of Plaintiff’s Form I-751, Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence. (Motion, Dkt. 20.) Defendants do not oppose the Motion. (Id.) According to the Motion, Plaintiff requests this matter be stayed pending USCIS’s adjudication of Plaintiff’s Form I-751 application as USCIS’s adjudication of the petition will render this proceeding moot. (Id.) Upon consideration, Plaintiff’s motion is granted. District courts are vested with broad discretion to stay proceedings, which authority is incidental to their inherent powers to control their dockets. See Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997) (“The [d]istrict [c]ourt has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to control its own docket.”); Advanced Bodycare Sols., LLC v. Thione Int'l, Inc., 524 F.3d 1235, 1241 (11th Cir. 2008) (“[D]istrict courts have inherent, discretionary authority to issue stays in many circumstances.”). Courts consider three factors when determining whether a stay is appropriate: (1) whether the stay will prejudice the non-moving party; (2) whether a stay will streamline the case for trial; and (3) whether a stay will reduce the burdens of litigation on the parties and on the court. Freedom Sci., Inc. v. GW Micro, Inc., No. 8:08-cv-1365-T-33TBM, 2009 WL 2423085, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 29, 2009). There is no prejudice as Defendants are unopposed to the stay. Next, the stay will streamline the case and reduce the burdens of litigation on the parties and the court because the case may be disposed of altogether if USCIS adjudicates Plaintiff's Form I-751 while the case is stayed. Accordingly, Plaintiffs Unopposed Motion to Stay Case (Dkt. 20) is GRANTED. This matter is STAYED pending USCIS’s adjudication of Plaintiff's Form I-751. The parties SHALL file a joint status report advising the court of USCIS’s

progress in adjudicating Plaintiff's Form I-751 every 90 days from the date of this Order. Either party may move to lift the stay no later than 30 days after USCIS’s adjudication of Plaintiff's Form IJ-751. The Clerk is DIRECTED to administratively close this case. ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on December 20, 2024.

( ya SZ. ielhess gle JUVIE S. SNEED UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record

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

Related

Clinton v. Jones
520 U.S. 681 (Supreme Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Henry v. Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henry-v-secretary-department-of-homeland-security-flmd-2024.