Elawyers Elawyers
Massachusetts| Change

Plascencia-De Haro v. Holder, 3:14-cv-03058. (2016)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20160208617 Visitors: 6
Filed: Feb. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 05, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, Jr. , District Judge . Pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff Gloria Plascencia-De Haro ("Haro") and Defendants Eric H. Holder, Jr., et al. ("Defendants" and collectively with Plaintiff, the "Parties") stipulate as follows: This is an immigration case arising under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701, in which Plaintiff challenges the denial by United States Citizenship and Immigration Se
More

STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME TO RESPOND TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Pursuant to Local Rules 6-2 and 7-12, Plaintiff Gloria Plascencia-De Haro ("Haro") and Defendants Eric H. Holder, Jr., et al. ("Defendants" and collectively with Plaintiff, the "Parties") stipulate as follows:

This is an immigration case arising under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701, in which Plaintiff challenges the denial by United States Citizenship and Immigration Services of Plaintiff's application for adjustment of status to permanent residence. Plaintiff also seeks to enjoin United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement from removing Plaintiff pursuant to an order of voluntary departure issued in 1994.

On April 2, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and for Partial Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 22.) On May 4, 2015, Plaintiff filed a motion to stay proceedings pending a decision in the Fifth Circuit case of State of Texas v. United States, No. 15-40238 (5th Cir.). (ECF No. 26.) Defendants opposed Plaintiff's motion. (ECF No. 31.) On September 3, 2015, the Court heard argument on Defendants' motion to dismiss and for summary judgment and took the pending motions under submission. (ECF No. 40.)

On January 26, 2016, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause directing the Parties to address "why this case should not be stayed pending issuance of the Supreme Court's decision" in United States of America, et al. v. State of Texas, et al., No. 15-674. (ECF No. 41.) The order directed the Parties to respond by February 5, 2016.

The Parties respectfully request and stipulate to an order extending the Parties' time to respond to the Order to Show Cause by fourteen days, from February 5, 2016, until and including February 19, 2016. Defendants require that extension due to recent inclement weather that closed the offices of Defendants' counsel for several days before and after the Court issued its Order to Show Cause, followed by several days of travel by Defendants' counsel to Los Angeles for a court hearing in an unrelated matter.

This requested time modification will have no effect on the schedule for this case.

In an email dated February 3, 2016, counsel for Plaintiff stated that Plaintiff would stipulate to a request to extend the Parties' time to respond to the Order to Show Cause, from February 5, 2016, until and including February 19, 2016. Undersigned counsel for Defendants attests he has on file all holographic signatures corresponding to any signatures indicated by a conformed signature ("/s/") within this Stipulation.

In addition to this Stipulation, previous time modifications in this case consist of the following:

On September 25, 2014, the parties stipulated to extend the time for Defendants to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint so that Plaintiff could file an amended complaint to account for additional administrative action that had occurred since the filing of her original complaint. (ECF No. 10.) On September 29, 2014, the Court endorsed the stipulation. (ECF No. 11.)

On March 2, 2015, the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendants' February 26, 2015, unopposed motion to extend their February 26, 2015, deadline to file their motion for summary judgment until and including April 27, 2015. (ECF No. 18.) The Court's March 2, 2015, order granted Defendants until and including March 19, 2015, to file their motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 19.)

On March 20, 2015, Defendants filed a second unopposed motion to extend their time to file their motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 20.) On March 20, 2015, the Court granted Defendants the motion and granted Defendants until and including April 2, 2015, to file their motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 21.)

On August 12, 2015, the Parties stipulated to continue the hearing date on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and for Partial Summary Judgment from August 20, 2015, to September 3, 2015. (ECF No. 38.) On August 13, 2015, the Court endorsed the stipulation. (ECF No. 39.)

Thus, for the reasons set forth above and for good cause show, the Parties request and stipulate to an order extending the Parties' time to respond to the Order to Show Cause by fourteen days, from February 5, 2016, until and including February 4, 2016.

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer