(HC) Jut Sarax De Vasquez v. Chestnut et al

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
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ZOILA JUT SARAX DE VASQUEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
CHRISTOPHER CHESTNUT, et al.,
Respondent,
Case No. 1:25-cv-1999-JDP
ORDER
The parties have filed a stipulation asking to stay this matter until the Court of Appeals
renders decision in Rodriguez Vasquez v. Bostock, 779 F. Supp. 3d 1239 (W.D. Wash. 2025),
Ninth Circuit docket no. 25-6842. ECF No. 16. It is unnecessary to delay judgment. While the
decision in Rodriguez Vasquez may turn out to be relevant, a somewhat unsettled legal landscape
does not justify an indefinite stay of the matter before this court. Notably, Rodriguez Vasquez has
yet to be argued and was only recently submitted.
If additional briefing is needed to decide the merits, within fourteen days of the date of
this order, respondents may file an answer. If respondents file an answer, petitioner may file a
traverse within seven days. If respondents do not file an answer by this deadline, the matter will
be deemed submitted.
Case 1:25-cv-01999-JDP Document 17 Filed 02/24/26 Page 1 of 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
2
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that if additional briefing is needed, respondents
may file an answer within fourteen days of the date of this order. If respondents file an answer,
petitioner may file a traverse within seven days. If respondents do not file an answer by this
deadline, the matter will be deemed submitted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 24, 2026
JEREMY D. PETERSON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 1:25-cv-01999-JDP Document 17 Filed 02/24/26 Page 2 of 2