1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 NIJAT ORUJOV, Case No. 24-cv-1792-BAS-JLB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 13 v. MOTION TO STAY (ECF No. 6)

14 UR M. JADDOU, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff filed this action to seek resolution of his asylum application. U.S. 18 Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) has scheduled an interview for this 19 application for August 5, 2025. (ECF No. 6 at 1.) Therefore, the parties jointly seek a stay 20 of the instant action while that adjudication is in progress. 21 “A district court has discretionary power to stay proceedings in its own court.” 22 Lockyer v. Mirant,

, 1109 (9th Cir. 2005) (citing Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299

, 254 (1936)). “[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent 24 in every court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time 25 and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis, 299 U.S. at 254. “A trial court 26 may, with propriety, find it is efficient for its own docket and the fairest course for the 27 parties to enter a stay of an action before it, pending resolution of independent proceedings 28 1 || which bear upon the case.” Leyva v. Certified Grocers of Calif.,

(9th 2 || Cir. 1979). 3 The Court finds a stay in this case is appropriate and effective in conserving time 4 effort for itself and the parties while the adjudication of the application is in progress. 5 || Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the Joint Motion and ORDERS that, if this case has not 6 voluntarily dismissed on or before December 3, 2025, the parties shall file a joint 7 status report on or before December 17, 2025. (ECF No. 6.) 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 10 || DATED: November 18, 2024 Lin A (Lyohaa 6 11 United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4.