Rahul Atmanand Prasad, et al. v. United States Citizenship and Immigration...

1 District Judge James L. Robart

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE RAHUL ATMANAND PRASAD, et al., No. 2:25-cv-654-JLR Plaintiffs, STIPULATED MOTION TO HOLD 11 CASE IN ABEYANCE AND v. [PROPOSED] ORDER UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND Noted for: October 17, 2025 IMMIGRATION SERVICES, 14 Defendant.

16 Defendant respectfully requests a stay of these proceedings due to the lapse of appropriations to the Department of Justice (the Department). Good cause exists for staying the proceedings in this case, and the interests of justice and judicial economy will be served by granting this motion.

19 Defendant’s counsel has conferred with Plaintiffs’ counsel who has agreed to stipulate to the requested relief of a stay followed by a joint status report once appropriations are restored. The Department provides the following background for the Court’s consideration.

22 At the end of the day on September 30, 2025, funding to the Department expired and its appropriations lapsed. The same is true for many Executive agency clients with whom Department attorneys must coordinate their litigation activities. The Department does not know when funding will be restored by Congress.

3 Absent an appropriation, certain Department attorneys and employees of the federal government are prohibited from working, even on a voluntary basis, except in very limited circumstances, including “emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property.” 31 U.S.C. § 1342. The term “‘emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property’ does not include ongoing, regular functions of government the suspension of which would not imminently threaten the safety of human life or the protection of property.” Id. Therefore, the lapse in appropriations requires a reduction in the workforce of the United States Attorney’s Office, particularly with respect to prosecution and defense of civil cases.

11 District courts have inherent power to stay proceedings in cases. Oregon Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ham & Rye, LLC, No. C10-579RJB, 2010 WL 2787852, at *3 (W.D. Wash. July 14, 2010). The “power to stay 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.’” Id. (citing Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936)). When determining whether to stay proceedings, a court should weigh the “competing interests which will be effected by the granting or refusal to grant a stay,” including “the possible damage which may result from the granting of a stay, the hardship or inequity which a party may suffer in being required to go forward, and the orderly course of justice measured in terms of the simplifying or complicating of issues, proof, and questions of law which could be expected to result from a stay.” Lockyer v. Mirant Corp., 398 F.3d 1098, 1109 (9th Cir. 2005) (citing Landis, 299 U.S. at 254).

22 The above factors weigh in favor of granting a stay of proceedings in cases handled by the United States Attorney’s Office, including this case. Most Assistant United States Attorneys and support staff in the Civil Division will be furloughed for the duration of the lapse in appropriations and will be unable to perform critical case work. For example, attorneys will not be able to engage in discovery, review case materials, prepare motions, engage in settlement discussions, or prepare for trial.

5 Specific to this case, Defendant will not be able to meet the next deadline to submit a joint status report, which is currently set for October 21, 2025. Plaintiffs brought this litigation pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act seeking, inter alia, to compel U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) to adjudicate their Forms I-526E, Immigrant Petition by Regional Center Investor, and Forms I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status. Pursuant to the parties’ previous request, this case is currently stayed through October 21, 2025, to allow for the parties to work towards resolution of this matter.

12 Plaintiffs will not be prejudiced by a stay. As previously reported, USCIS had approved most Plaintiffs’ Forms I-526s and was working towards adjudicating the remaining applications.

14 Furthermore, USCIS is actively processing the remaining Forms I-526s and is processing Plaintiffs’ Forms I-485s thereafter. USCIS continues to operate during the lapse in funding so these processes should not be interrupted. Once the lapse in appropriations has ended, Defendant’s counsel will be able to obtain and provide a further report concerning the applications.

18 Accordingly, Defendant requests the Court stay this case for the duration of the current lapse of appropriations. As set forth in the proposed order, Defendant further requests that the stay be lifted automatically and immediately as soon as the lapse of appropriations has ended. Defendants ask the Court to order the parties to confer and file a joint status report within ten court days after the restoration of funding.

23 // Dated: October 17, 2025 Respectfully submitted, 2 CHARLES NEIL FLOYD United States Attorney s/Michelle R. Lambert 4 MICHELLE R. LAMBERT, NYS #4666657 Assistant United States Attorney 5 United States Attorney’s Office 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 700 6 Tacoma, Washington 98402 Phone: 253-428-3824 7 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant I certify that this memorandum contains 752 words, in 9 compliance with the Local Civil Rules.

s/ Jesse M. Bless 11 JESSE M. BLESS, PHV Bless Litigation LLC 12 6 Vineyard Lane Georgetown, Massachusetts 01833 13 Phone: 718-704-3897 Email: [email protected] 15 s/ Anahita M. George ANAHITA M. GEORGE, WSBA# 57799 16 George Immigration PLLC 5719 Stetson Ct. NW 17 Olympia, Washington 98502 Phone: 425-328-9339 18 Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiffs

1 [PROPOSED] ORDER Pursuant to the parties’ Stipulated Motion, it is hereby ORDERED that the above captioned proceeding is stayed for the duration of the current lapse of appropriations. It is ORDERED that this stay be lifted automatically and immediately as soon as the lapse of appropriations has ended. It is further ORDERED that the parties are to confer and file a joint status report within ten court days after the restoration of funding.

DATED this 20th day of October, 2025.

A JAMES L. ROBART 12 United States District Judge