=: the government's deadline to respond is extended to December 3, . 2025 (with a corresponding extension in the deadline to make pre- a United States Attorney vonferee filings). The time and location remain the same. □

86 Chambers Street Plaintiff is instructed, on or before November 3, 2025, to cither (1) New York. New York 10007 voluntarily dismiss this action given the scheduling of the interview October 30, 2025 or (2) show cause why this action is not moot. VIA ECF The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at 7. . ECF No. 11. Hon. Arun Subramanian United States District Judge SO ORDERED. United States District Court 500 Pearl Street New York, New York 10007 Re: Gusev v. Varghese, 25 Civ. 7113 (AS) Arun Subramanian, U.S.D.J. Dear Judge Subramanian: Date: October 30, 2025 This Office represents the government in this action in which the plaintiff seeks an order compelling U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate an Application For Asylum and Withholding of Removal (“Asylum Application”). I write respectfully to request that: (1) the Court adjourn the initial pretrial conference presently scheduled for November 3, 2025, at 11:30 a.m., to a date on or after December 3, 2025, that is convenient to the Court and the parties (with a corresponding extension of time for the preconference submissions), see ECF No. 10; and (2) to extend the government’s deadline to answer or otherwise respond to plaintiff's complaint to December 3, 2025. The reason for the request is that plaintiffs asylum interview was recently scheduled for November 3, 2025, which renders this action moot. Specifically, plaintiff seeks a writ of mandamus directing USCIS to schedule and complete the adjudication of his Asylum Application. On September 30, 2025, USCIS issued a notice scheduling plaintiffs asylum interview for November 3, 2025. I received a copy of this notice on October 10, 2025, and, that same day, I emailed the notice to counsel for plaintiff. Given that USCIS has scheduled an interview on plaintiff's application, this action is moot. See, e.g., Shashiashvili v. Garland, No. 24-CV-7666 (BMC),

, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 2, 2025) (noncitizen’s request for order compelling USCIS to “adjudicate” immigration application was moot because USCIS scheduled plaintiffs interview which “will allow plaintiffs application to move forward, granting him the relief sought in this lawsuit”); Yusupov v. Mayorkas, No. 21-CV-4066 (EK),

, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2021) (same). The government has attempted to contact counsel for plaintiff concerning this matter, via email, on October 20, 2025, October 27, 2025, and October 29, 2025, but, as of the submission of this letter, has not received a response. Further, I attempted to call plaintiff's counsel on October 28, 2025, and was informed that counsel was not in the office but would get back to me shortly; however, as of the submission of this letter, the government has not received a response. Given this, the government respectfully requests the above extension of its response deadline and adjournment of the initial pretrial conference, which will preserve court and party resources. This is the government’s second request for an adjournment of the initial pretrial conference and first request for an extension of time to respond to plaintiff's complaint.

I thank the Court for its consideration of these requests. Respectfully submitted, JAY CLAYTON United States Attorney

By: /s/ Jacob M. Bergman JACOB M. BERGMAN Assistant United States Attorney 86 Chambers Street, 3rd Floor New York, New York 10007 Tel: (212) 637-2776 E-mail: [email protected]

cc: Counsel of record (via ECF)