Datta v. Jaddou

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE SIDHARTHA DATTA, et al., CASE NO. 2:22-cv-1302-JHC Plaintiffs, ORDER v. UR M. JADDOU, Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, et al., Defendants.

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. The Court held a telephonic conference on September 8, 2023, in which the parties indicated that they would not oppose a stay pending the Ninth Circuit’s decision on Plaintiffs’ appeal of the Court’s denial of their motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO). Dkt. # 20.

In determining whether to stay a case, “the competing interests which will be affected by the granting or refusal to grant a stay must be weighed.” Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 20 1098, 1110 (9th Cir. 2005) (citing CMAX, Inc. v. Hall, 300 F.2d 265, 268 (9th Cir. 1962)).

Those interests include: (1) “the possible damage which may result from the granting of a stay,” (2) “the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to go forward,” and (3) “the orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues, l proof, and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay.” /d. Here, the Court finds that these factors weigh in favor of staying this case.

3 The Court hereby STAYS this case until the Ninth Circuit resolves Plaintiffs’ appeal of || this Court’s denial of their motion fora TRO. The Clerk is directed to terminate Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. # 14).

6 Dated this 8th day of September, 2023.

7 C] ok. 4. Chur 8 John H. Chun United States District Judge 1]