Singh v. Jaddou

District Court, W.D. Washington·Decided December 18, 2024·No. 2:24-cv-01703·Unknown

Opinion

1 The Honorable Barbara J. Rothstein 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE 9 JASHANDEEP SINGH, Case No. 2:24-cv-01703-BJR 10 Plaintiff, STIPULATED MOTION TO HOLD 11 v. CASE IN ABEYANCE AND ORDER 12 UR JADDOU, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 Plaintiff and Defendants, by and through their counsel of record, pursuant to Federal Rule 16 of Civil Procedure 6 and Local Rules 7(d)(1), 10(g) and 16, hereby jointly stipulate and move to 17 hold this case in abeyance until June 11, 2025. Plaintiff brought this litigation pursuant to the 18 Administrative Procedure Act and Mandamus Act seeking, inter alia, to compel the U.S. 19 Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) adjudicate his Form I-589, Application for 20 Asylum and for Withholding of Removal. Defendants’ response to the Complaint is currently 21 due on December 27, 2024. The parties are currently working towards a resolution to this 22 litigation. For good cause, the parties request that the Court hold the case in abeyance until June 23 11, 2025. 24 1 Courts have “broad discretion” to stay proceedings. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 2 (1997). “[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to 3 control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for 4 counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936); see also Fed. R. Civ.

5 P.1. 6 With additional time, this case may be resolved without the need of further judicial 7 intervention. USCIS has scheduled Plaintiff’s asylum interview for February 11, 2025. USCIS 8 agrees to diligently work towards completing the adjudication within 120 days of the interview, 9 absent unforeseen or exceptional circumstances that would require additional time for 10 adjudication. If the adjudication is not completed within that time, USCIS will provide a status 11 report to the Court. Plaintiff will submit all supplemental documents and evidence, if any, to 12 USCIS seven to ten days prior to the interview date. Plaintiff recognizes that failure to submit 13 documents prior to the interview may require the interview to be rescheduled and the

14 adjudication delayed. If needed, Plaintiff will bring an interpreter to the interview, otherwise the 15 interview will need to be rescheduled and the adjudication delayed. After the interview, USCIS 16 will need time to adjudicate Plaintiff’s asylum application. Once the application is adjudicated, 17 Plaintiff will dismiss the case with each party to bear their own litigation costs and attorneys’ 18 fees. Accordingly, the parties request this abeyance to allow USCIS to conduct Plaintiff’s 19 asylum interview and then process his asylum application. 20 As additional time is necessary for this to occur, the parties request that the Court hold 21 the case in abeyance until June 11, 2025. The parties will submit a joint status report on or 22 before June 11, 2025. 23 //

24 // 1 DATED this 16th day of December, 2024 \ 2 Respectfully submitted, 3 TESSA M. GORMAN GIBBS HOUSTON PAUW United States Attorney 4 s/ Michelle R. Lambert s/ Emily Simcock 5 MICHELLE R. LAMBERT, NYS #4666657 EMILY SIMCOCK, WSBA# 55635 Assistant United States Attorney 1000 Second Avenue, Suite 1600 6 United States Attorney’s Office Seattle, Washington 98104-1003 Western District of Washington Phone: (206) 682-1080 7 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700 Email: emily.simcock@ghp-law.net Tacoma, Washington 98402 8 Phone: (253) 428-3824 Attorney for Plaintiff Fax: (253) 428-3826 9 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov 10 Attorneys for Defendants 11 I certify that this memorandum contains 414 words, in compliance with the Local Civil Rules. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 ORDER 2 The case is held in abeyance until June 11, 2025. The parties shall submit a joint status 3 report on or before June 11, 2025. It is so ORDERED. 4

5 DATED this 18th day of December, 2024. 6 A 7 Barbara J. Rothstein 8 United States District Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

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

Singh v. Jaddou, (W.D. Wash. 2024).

Singh v. Jaddou (Singh v. Jaddou) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Landis v. North American Co.
299 U.S. 248 (Supreme Court, 1936)
Clinton v. Jones
520 U.S. 681 (Supreme Court, 1997)