Filed: May 30, 2017
Latest Update: May 30, 2017
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS' REPLY UP TO AND INCLUDING FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2017, AND TO RESCHEDULE THE JUNE 15, 2017 HEARING EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . In this immigration case, Plaintiff Khalil Janjua ("Janjua") filed an amended complaint on August 4, 2016, challenging — under the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") —United States Citizenship and Immigration Services' ("USCIS") denial of his application to adjust his immigration status to that of a lawful permanent resident.
Summary: JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS' REPLY UP TO AND INCLUDING FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2017, AND TO RESCHEDULE THE JUNE 15, 2017 HEARING EDWARD M. CHEN , District Judge . In this immigration case, Plaintiff Khalil Janjua ("Janjua") filed an amended complaint on August 4, 2016, challenging — under the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") —United States Citizenship and Immigration Services' ("USCIS") denial of his application to adjust his immigration status to that of a lawful permanent resident. ..
More
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEFENDANTS' REPLY UP TO AND INCLUDING FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2017, AND TO RESCHEDULE THE JUNE 15, 2017 HEARING
EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.
In this immigration case, Plaintiff Khalil Janjua ("Janjua") filed an amended complaint on August 4, 2016, challenging — under the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") —United States Citizenship and Immigration Services' ("USCIS") denial of his application to adjust his immigration status to that of a lawful permanent resident. Defendants filed their answer to Janjua's amended complaint on August 16, 2016. The parties agree that discovery is inappropriate because judicial review in cases brought under the APA is limited to "the whole record or those parts of it cited by a party." 5 U.S.C. § 706; see also Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402 (1971).
Since then, the parties have both moved for summary judgment. The parties now stipulate to extend Defendants' time in which to file their reply in support of their motion for summary judgment up to and including Friday, June 1, 2017, only nine days after the original filing deadline of May 24, 2017.
The parties respectfully suggest that, in light of their agreement on the above matters, the Court should vacate the hearing now scheduled for Thursday, June 15, 2017, at 1:30 p.m. and schedule a hearing on the pending motions for summary judgment at a later date.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
