Huizache v. Unknown Party

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WO
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
David Axinicuilteco Huizache,
Plaintiff,
v.
Unknown Party, et al.,
Defendants.
No. CV-25-02387-PHX-KML
ORDER
On December 8, 2025, defendant Joseph Edlow, Director of the United States
Citizenship and Immigration Services, filed a motion to dismiss. (Doc. 17.) That motion
argued the court lacked jurisdiction and the complaint did not state a claim for relief.
Plaintiff David Axinicuilteco Huizache’s opposition was due January 12, 2026. No
opposition was filed.
Local Rule 7.2(i) allows the court to summarily grant a motion to dismiss when no
opposition is filed. Pursuant to that rule, the motion is granted. But even if the court were
to reach the merits, defendant appears to be correct that this court lacks jurisdiction to issue
some of the relief Huizache seeks. See N-N v. Mayorkas, 540 F. Supp. 3d 240, 255-58
(E.D.N.Y. 2021) (court lacked jurisdiction to review claim alleging failure to make “bona
fide” determination). And to the extent Huizache is seeking a form of relief the court could
order, he has not sufficiently alleged unreasonable delay in adjudicating his application.
See id. at 260-64 (applying factors discussed in Telecommunications Rsch. & Action Ctr.
v. F.C.C., 750 F.2d 70 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (“TRAC factors”)). Based on the limited
Case 2:25-cv-02387-KML Document 18 Filed 01/21/26 Page 1 of 2

- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
information available, the “TRAC factors” establish Huizache would not be entitled to
relief. See id.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 17) is GRANTED. The complaint
is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment and
close this case.
Dated this 21st day of January, 2026.
Case 2:25-cv-02387-KML Document 18 Filed 01/21/26 Page 2 of 2