Zhang v. Dehart

Opinion

District Judge Kymberly K. Evanson

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

QINGLI ZHANG, Case No. 2:24-cv-00064-KKE Plaintiff, STIPULATED MOTION TO HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE AND ORDER v. Noted for Consideration on: JIM DEHART, et al., April 8, 2024 Defendants. Plaintiff and Defendants, by and through their counsel of record, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6 and Local Rules 7(d)(1), 10(g) and 16, hereby jointly stipulate and move to stay discovery, including the Court’s Order setting Initial Scheduling Dates (Dkt. No. 7) until after this Court decides Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 8). Plaintiff brings this litigation pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act and Mandamus Act seeking, inter alia, to compel Defendants to complete processing his non-immigrant visa application. Defendants’ motion is noted for April 19, 2024. For good cause, the parties request that the Court stay discovery until after this motion is decided. This Court has wide discretion to stay discovery while a motion to dismiss is pending. Rae v. Union Bank, 725 F.2d 478, 481 (9th Cir. 1984); Jarvis v. Regan, 833 F.2d 149, 155 (9th Cir. 1987). A court may relieve a party of the burdens of discovery while a motion is pending pursuant to its inherent authority over discovery matters and pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Id.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) (a court may deny or limit discovery upon a showing

of good cause). Stays are appropriate where it “furthers the goal of efficiency for the court and litigants.” Little v. City of Seattle, 863 F.2d 681, 685 (9th Cir. 1988); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 (Federal Rules should be “construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.”). Because the motion to dismiss, if granted, would be fully dispositive of this case, a stay of discovery would save both time and resources, as well as potential judicial resources regarding discovery disputes. Accordingly, the parties respectfully request that discovery be stayed and the initial scheduling deadlines (Dkt. No. 7) be vacated. If Defendants’ motion to dismiss is denied, the parties will submit a joint status report within 14 days. //

// // // // // // // // //

// // DATED this 8th day of April, 2024. Respectfully submitted,

TESSA M. GORMAN GOLDST EI N IMMIGR ATION LAWYERS United States Attorney s/Michelle R. Lambert s/Joshua L. Goldstein MICHELLE R. LAMBERT, NYS #4666657 JOSHUA L. GOLDSTEIN, WSBA# 61773 Assistant United States Attorney 611 Wilshire Boulevard, Ste. 317 United States Attorney’s Office Los Angeles, California 90017 Western District of Washington Phone: (213) 425-1979 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700 Email: jg@jgoldlaw.com Tacoma, Washington 98402 Phone: (253) 428-3824 Email: michelle.lambert@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Defendants Attorney for Plaintiff I certify that this memorandum contains 326 words, in compliance with the Local Civil Rules.

Discovery is stayed pending a decision on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 8). The deadlines in the Order Regarding Initial Disclosures, Chambers Procedures, Joint Status

Report, and Early Settlement (Dkt. No. 7) are VACATED. If the Motion to Dismiss is denied, the parties shall submit a joint status report within 14 days of the order. It is so ORDERED. Dated this 9th day of April, 2024. A Kymberly K. Evanson United States District Judge