Krutina v. Higgins

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE LIDIIA IVANOVNA KRUTINA, Case No. 2:25-cv-0213-RSM Plaintiff, ORDER TO HOLD CASE IN 11 v. ABEYANCE JENNIFER B. HIGGINS, et al., 13 Defendants.

15 This matter comes before the Court on the parties Stipulated Motion. Dkt. #4. Plaintiff brought this litigation pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act and Mandamus Act seeking, inter alia, to compel the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate his Form I-589, Application for Asylum. The parties are currently working towards a resolution to this litigation. For good cause, the parties request that the Court continue to hold the case in abeyance until August 12, 2025.

21 Courts have “broad discretion” to stay proceedings. Clinton v. Jones, 520 U.S. 681, 706 (1997). “[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every court to control the disposition of the causes on its docket with economy of time and effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936); see also Fed. R. Civ. 2 P. 1.

3 With additional time, this case may be resolved without the need of further judicial intervention. USCIS has scheduled Plaintiff’s asylum interview for June 12, 2025. After the interview, USCIS will need time to adjudicate her asylum application. Once that happens, Plaintiff will dismiss this case.

7 Accordingly, the Court hereby FINDS and ORDERS that the case is held in abeyance until August 12, 2025. The parties shall submit a joint status report on or before August 12, 2025.

10 DATED this 24th day of April, 2025.

11 A RICARDO S. MARTINEZ 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE