Filed: Apr. 22, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 22, 2016
Summary: ORDER JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT UNTIL JUNE 13, 2016 IMMIGRATION CASE RICHARD SEEBORG , District Judge . Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), the parties, through undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate to extend the time in which Defendants must answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint up to and including Monday, June 13, 2016. The grounds for this motion are as follows. 1. Plaintiff, Sadiqa Hamidi ("Plaintiff") is a citizen of the Un
Summary: ORDER JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT UNTIL JUNE 13, 2016 IMMIGRATION CASE RICHARD SEEBORG , District Judge . Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), the parties, through undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate to extend the time in which Defendants must answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint up to and including Monday, June 13, 2016. The grounds for this motion are as follows. 1. Plaintiff, Sadiqa Hamidi ("Plaintiff") is a citizen of the Uni..
More
ORDER JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME IN WHICH TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT UNTIL JUNE 13, 2016
IMMIGRATION CASE
RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), the parties, through undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate to extend the time in which Defendants must answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint up to and including Monday, June 13, 2016. The grounds for this motion are as follows.
1. Plaintiff, Sadiqa Hamidi ("Plaintiff") is a citizen of the United States and a resident of Alameda County in California, and is married to Mr. Sardar Agha Sher ("Sher"),1 a native and citizen of Afghanistan.
2. On July 25, 2009, Plaintiff filed an immigrant visa petition on behalf of her husband with the California Service Center of the United States Citizenship & Immigration Services ("USCIS").
3. On Friday, July 14, 2009, the Embassy denied the application, citing 8 U.S.C. § 1201(g). The Embassy instructed Mr. Sher to submit additional documents and information if he wished to for his application to be considered. See Exhibit A (Declaration).
4. On September 21, 2015, Plaintiff filed the instant complaint seeking relief under the Administrative Procedure Act and a writ of mandamus to compel the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ("USCIS") to adjudicate her husband's immigrant visa application.
5. Thereafter, on January 6, 2016, the Embassy e-mailed the beneficiary requesting him to complete an electronic visa application, Form DS-260. See Exhibit A (Declaration). Mr. Hamidi is currently working on his completing his application.
6. Defendants' Answer was originally due in this Court on February 29, 2016, but the Court granted Defendants' unopposed request for an extension of time until April 21, 2016. See Exhibit B (Endorsed Order granting Defendants' first request for extension of time).
7. In order to allow Plaintiff sufficient time to provide the additional required documentation requested by the Embassy, and to give the United States Department of State adequate time to evaluate this information and issue a decision on the application for a visa, the parties stipulate that the Court reset the date for Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint to Monday, June 13, 2016.
8. This stipulation is filed in good faith and not for the purpose of undue delay, and will not impact the schedule of this case.
[proposed] ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on the parties' Joint Stipulation To Extend Time In Which To Respond To The Complaint Until June 13, 2016.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that for good cause shown, the Joint Stipulation is GRANTED.
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the time for Defendants to answer the Complaint or otherwise plead be extended until Monday, June 13, 2016.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
