Mohammadreza Hemmati v. Antony Blinken

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL No. CV 24-5620 FMO (MAAx) Date July 9, 2025 Title Mohammadreza Hemmati, et al. v. Marco Rubio, et al.

Present: The Honorable — Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge Vanessa Figueroa None Present Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: None Present None Present Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal Re: Mootness Having reviewed and considered the Notices of Voluntary Dismissal filed by certain plaintiffs, (see Dkt. 22, Notice of Dismissal of October 3, 2024, (“First NOD”)); (Dkt. 49, Notice of Dismissal of April 29, 2025, (“Second NOD”)); and the case updates filed by defendants, (see Dkt.

48, Notice of Case Updates of April 18, 2025, (“April 18 Updates”)); (Dkt. 50, Notice of Case Updates of May 14, 2025, (“May 14 Updates”)), the court concludes as follows.

This action, which seeks to compel the adjudication of certain pending visa applications, was initially filed by eight plaintiffs. (See Dkt. 1, Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, (“Complaint”) at {| 27-34). However, five plaintiffs have since voluntarily dismissed their claims. (See Dkt. 22, First NOD); (Dkt. 49, Second NOD). Additionally, it appears that the visa petitions of the three remaining plaintiffs have been adjudicated. (See DKt.

48, April 18 Updates at 1) (representing that administrative processing in the case of plaintiff Mohammad Ali Niktab Etaati has concluded); (Dkt. 50, May 14 Updates at 1) (representing that administrative processing in the cases of plaintiffs Ali Jahanbazi Jahanabad and Parastoo Sadat Morteza Zadeh Daragheh has concluded). Under the circumstances, there does not appear to be any need for court intervention at this time as to the claims of the remaining three plaintiffs.

Accordingly, IT |S ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiffs shall, no later than July 15, 2025, show cause in writing as to why this action should not be dismissed on mootness grounds. Failure to file a timely response to this Order to Show Cause by the deadline set forth above shall be deemed as consent to the dismissal of the action for mootness and/or failure to comply with the orders of the court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388 (1962).

2. Defendants shall file their reply to plaintiffs’ response no later than July 21, 2025.

3. All case deadlines are hereby vacated pending the court’s review of the responses to this Order to Show Cause.

Initials of Preparer vdr