Free Answer to Complaint - District Court of California - California

Case 3:08-cv-02207-JCS

Document 3

Filed 07/11/2008

Page 1 of 4

1 JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO, CSBN 44332 United States Attorney 2 JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143 Assistant United States Attorney 3 Chief, Civil Division ILA C. DEISS, NY SBN 3052909 4 Assistant United States Attorney 5 6 7 Attorneys for Defendants 8 9 10 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) No. C 08-2207 SC ) ) ) ANSWER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055 San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone: (415) 436-7124 FAX: (415) 436-7169

12 KAMALDEEP SAHOTA, MAJIT MEHMI, 13 Plaintiffs, 14 v. 15 MICHAEL MUKASEY, Attorney General 16 of the United States; SCOTT BLACKMAN, Acting Regional Director 17 of U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services California Service Center, 18 Defendants. 19 20 21

Defendants hereby submit their answer to Plaintiffs' Petition for Writ of Mandamus. The initial unnumbered Paragraph consists of Plaintiffs' characterizations of the lawsuit for

22 which no answer is necessary; however, to the extent a response is deemed to be required, 23 Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph One. 24 25 26 27 28 THE PARTIES 1. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph One. 2. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph Two. 3. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph Three. 4. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph Four. ANSWER C08-2207 SC 1

Case 3:08-cv-02207-JCS

Document 3

Filed 07/11/2008

Page 2 of 4

1

5. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph Five. Christina Poulos is the Regional

2 Director of the California Service Center in Laguna Niguel. 3 4 5 THE FACTS 6. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph Six. 7. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph Seven. Defendants served a Request for

6 Additional Evidence (RFE) upon Plaintiffs on June 6, 2008. The evidence must be submitted to 7 the USCIS on or before August 29, 2008. USCIS will adjudicate the I-130 after receiving the 8 evidence requested. 9 8. Defendants are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in Paragraph

10 Eight. 11 12 9. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph Nine. 10. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph Ten. The sole purpose of the Request for

13 Evidence issued to the Plaintiff on June 6, 2008 is to obtain sufficient evidence to permit the 14 agency to make the determination of the bona fides of the marriage. 15 11. Defendants are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

16 Paragraph Eleven. 17 18 ARGUMENT 12. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph Twelve. Defendants are prepared to

19 adjudicate this petition following receipt of the requested additional evidence. 20 21 22 I. CLEAR RIGHT TO RELIEF 14. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph Fourteen. 15. Paragraph Fifteen consists of Plaintiffs' characterizations of the action for which no

23 answer is necessary; however, to the extent a response is deemed necessary, Defendants deny the 24 allegations in Paragraph Fifteen. 25 16. Paragraph Sixteen consists of Plaintiffs' characterizations of the action for which no

26 answer is necessary; however, to the extent a response is deemed necessary, Defendants deny the 27 allegations in Paragraph Sixteen. 28 17. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph Seventeen. Defendants are prepared to ANSWER C08-2207 SC 2

Case 3:08-cv-02207-JCS

Document 3

Filed 07/11/2008

Page 3 of 4

1 adjudicate this petition following receipt of the requested additional evidence, which is due in 2 August 2008. 3 4 5 6 II. CLEAR DUTY TO ACT 18. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph Eighteen. 19. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph Nineteen. 20. Pending receipt of the additional evidence that is requested on June 6, 2008, USCIS is

7 unable to adjudicate this petition. 8 9 10 III. LACK OF ANY OTHER ADEQUATE REMEDY 21. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph Twenty-One. 22. Paragraph Twenty-Two consists of Plaintiffs' characterizations of the action for which no

11 answer is necessary; however, to the extent a response is deemed necessary, Defendants deny the 12 allegations in Paragraph Twenty-Two. 13 14 NATURE OF RELIEF SOUGHT The remaining paragraph consists of Plaintiff's prayer for relief, to which no admission or

15 denial is required; to the extent a responsive pleading is deemed to be required, Defendant denies 16 this paragraph. 17 18 19 20 21 22 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Complaint fails to state a claim against the Defendants upon which relief can be granted. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE No acts or omissions by the United States or its employees were the proximate cause of any

23 injury or damages to the Plaintiffs. 24 25 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE At all times alleged in the complaint, Defendants were acting with good faith, with

26 justification, and pursuant to authority. 27 28 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Defendants are processing the application referred to in the Complaint to the extent possible at ANSWER C08-2207 SC 3

Case 3:08-cv-02207-JCS

Document 3

Filed 07/11/2008

Page 4 of 4

1 this time. Accordingly, no relief as prayed for is warranted. 2 3 4 5 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Defendants' delay is not unreasonable as a matter of law. WHEREFORE, Defendants pray for relief as follows: That judgment be entered for Defendants and against Plaintiffs, dismissing Plaintiffs'

6 complaint with prejudice; that Plaintiffs take nothing; and that the Court grant such further relief 7 as it deems just and proper under the circumstances. 8 Dated: July 11, 2008 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANSWER C08-2207 SC 4 ___________/s/_________________ ILA C. DEISS Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendants Respectfully submitted, JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO United States Attorney