Gusev v. Varghese
- Subramanian
- 1:25-cv-07113
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Gusev v. Varghese, Judge Subramanian extended the government’s response deadline and instructed Gusev to dismiss or explain why the case is not moot.
Gusev and the government, including USCIS; the order also affects the scheduling of the case and the upcoming initial pretrial conference.
What happened
Gusev v. Varghese concerns a request to require U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to adjudicate Gusev’s asylum application. The government reported that the agency scheduled Gusev’s asylum interview for November 3, 2025.
The government argued that the scheduled interview made the case moot because it would allow the application to move forward. It asked for more time to respond to the complaint and asked to move the initial pretrial conference to a date on or after December 3, 2025.
Judge Arun Subramanian extended the government’s deadline to respond to December 3, 2025, and extended the deadline for pre-conference filings accordingly. The conference’s time and location remained unchanged. The court instructed Gusev to voluntarily dismiss the case by November 3 or explain why the case is not moot, and directed the Clerk to terminate the motion at ECF No. 11.
The detailed version
- Gusev v. Varghese · No. 1:25-cv-07113
- Subramanian
- Oct. 30, 2025
Background
Gusev brought this action seeking an order requiring U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to schedule and complete adjudication of an application for asylum and withholding of removal. The government stated that USCIS had issued a notice scheduling Gusev’s asylum interview for November 3, 2025.
Government’s Request
The government argued that scheduling the interview made the action moot because the interview would allow Gusev’s application to move forward and would provide the relief sought in the lawsuit. It asked the court to extend its deadline to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint until December 3, 2025, and to move the initial pretrial conference and related pre-conference filing deadline.
Court’s Action
Judge Arun Subramanian extended the government’s deadline to respond to December 3, 2025, with a corresponding extension of the deadline for pre-conference filings. The court stated that the time and location of the initial pretrial conference remained the same. The court instructed Gusev, by November 3, 2025, either to voluntarily dismiss the action or to show cause—meaning explain—why the action was not moot. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 11. The order did not itself state that the case was dismissed or decide that it was moot.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.