Bijjula v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ( 2024 )

1 JUAnSitOedN S Mtat.e Fs RAItEtoRrnSeOyN 2 District of Nevada Nevada Bar No. 7709 3 VIRGINIA T. TOMOVA Assistant United States Attorney 4 Nevada Bar No. 12504 501 Las Vegas Blvd. So., Suite 1100 5 Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 (702) 388-6533 6 Virginia.Tomova@usdoj.gov Attorneys for the Federal Defendants 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 9 Ragneel Reddy Bijjula, an individual Case No. 3:24-cv-00441-MMD-CSD ORDER GRANTING 10 Plaintiff, United States’ Motion to Extend the Time to Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint 11 v. 12 United States Citizenship and Immigration (First Request) Services, 13 Defendant. 14 15 Defendant United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“United States”), 16 respectfully requests a 60-day extension to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff Ragneel 17 Reddy Bijjula’s Complaint (ECF No. 1). The current deadline to respond is December 2, 18 2024. United States seeks an extension of 60 days, because USCIS needs the additional 19 time to adjudicate Plaintiff’s I-829 Petition by Investor to Remove Conditions on 20 Permanent Resident Status. The purpose of the extension is for the agency to review the 21 information submitted by Plaintiff and to determine if additional information is needed 22 prior to adjudicating the petition. The undersigned communicated with Plaintiff’s counsel 23 regarding the request for a 60-day extension. See Correspondence, attached as Exhibit A. 24 Plaintiff’s counsel stated that he would ask Plaintiff. Exhibit A. 25 To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the request for extension. Considering the 26 upcoming deadline to respond, the instant motion is necessary. This is the first request for 27 an extension of time to respond to the Plaintiff’s complaint. 28 / / / 1 Memorandum of Points and Authorities 2 Plaintiff filed his I-829 petition less than 6 months ago on May 1, 2024. ECF No. 1, 3 The time to adjudicate such petition takes approximately 5 years. 4A || https://ebSvisainvestments.com/2020/11/17/1-829-processing-times-an-eb-5-investors- 5 || guide/ Thus, there is no undue delay in processing his petition. Plaintiff filed a complaint 6 || alleging an undue delay in the processing of his petition. ECF No. 1. The agency has 7 || requested a 60-day extension to respond to the plaintiff's complaint. This additional time is 8 || necessary to review the petition and to determine if additional information is needed prior 9 || to its adjudication. 10 Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), a court may, “for good cause,” extend 11 || a deadline if a request is made “before the original time or its extension requires.” Fed. R. 12 || Civ. P. 6(b)(1)(A); see also Local Rule IA 6-1(a). The Ninth Circuit has equated good cause 13 || with the exercise of due diligence. See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 14 || 609 (9th Cir. 1992). 15 Good cause exists here because the United States has been diligent in trying to 16 || evaluate Plaintiff's I-829 petition prior to the 5 years it generally takes for such petition. If 17 || this motion is granted, the new deadline to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's 18 || compliant will be February 3, 2025. Given the United States’ diligence, good cause exists 19 || for the extension. The United States therefore requests that the Court grant the motion. 20 Respectfully submitted this 20th day of November 2024. 21 JASON M. FRIERSON 59 United States Attorney /s/ Virginia T. Tomova 23 VIRGINIA T. TOMOVA Assistant United States Attorney 25 || IT |S SO ORDERED. 26 || DATED: November 21, 2024. c Ss 27 Sy Craig S. Denney 28 United States Magistrate Judge