Mansor v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

FAYEZ MANSOR, et al., CASE NO. C23-0347JLR Plaintiffs, MINUTE ORDER v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, et al., Defendants.

The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable James L. Robart: Before the court is Defendants United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”), Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, and Director Ur Jaddou’s (collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss, asserting, in part, that Plaintiffs Fayez Mansor and Shukria Zafari lack standing. (MTD (Dkt. # 42) at 7-9.) Defendants argue for the first time on reply that because as of June 9, 2023, USCIS allows Afghan parolees to extend their temporary employment authorization free of charge, Mr. Mansor’s and Ms. Zafari’s theory of standing fails. (See Reply (Dkt. # 47) at 3 & n.2 (citing USCIS press release);

see also Resp. (Dkt. # 46) at 5-7 (arguing Mr. Mansor and Ms. Zafari’s impending loss of employment authorization incident to their parole status confers standing).) Because Defendants raise this argument for the first time on reply, Plaintiffs have not had occasion to brief the issue. (See Dkt.) Arguments raised on reply are typically waived. Turtle Island Restoration Network v. U.S. Dep’t of Com., 672 F.3d 1160, 1166 n.8 (9th Cir. 2012). But where, as here, the untimely argument attacks a party’s standing and the

court’s subject matter jurisdiction, supplemental briefing is appropriate to allow the opposing party to respond. See, e.g., Bank of Am., N.A. v. Hidden Canyon Owners Ass’n, Case No. 2:16-cv-02764-RFB-EJY, 202 WL 1643701, at *3 (D. Nev. April 2, 2020) (ordering supplemental briefing to allow plaintiff to respond to defendant’s argument regarding standing and subject matter jurisdiction raised on reply).

Accordingly, the court ORDERS Plaintiffs to file supplemental briefing that addresses the impact, if any, of USCIS’s new program waiving the fees for Afghan nationals’ work authorization renewals on Plaintiffs Fayez Mansor and Shukria Zafari’s standing. (See Reply at 3 & n.2.) Plaintiffs’ supplemental brief shall not exceed 1,500 words and shall be filed by no later than July 12, 2023. Defendants may file a response

not to exceed 1,000 words by no later than July 14, 2023. The Clerk is DIRECTED to renote Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. # 42), as well as Plaintiffs’ motions for class certification (Dkt. # 2) and for a preliminary injunction (Dkt. # 3), for July 14, 2023. Filed and entered this 30th day of June, 2023. Clerk of Court s/ Ashleigh Drecktrah Deputy Clerk