Free Order - District Court of California - California

Case 5:07-cv-03786-JF

Document 4 5

Filed 10/05/2007 10/10/2007

Page 1 of 2

**E-filed 10/10/07** 1 SCOTT N. SCHOOLS, SC SBN 9990 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 12 ALEXANDER FURMAN, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Each of the undersigned certifies that he or she has read either the handbook entitled "Dispute UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Department of Homeland Security, ) MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary; ) United States Citizenship and Immigration ) Services, EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, Director; ) United States Citizenship and Immigration ) Services, ROSEMARY MELVILLE, District ) Director; U.S. Attorney General, ALBERTO ) GONZALES; Federal Bureau of Investigation, ) ROBERT S. MUELLER, III, Director, ) ) Defendants. ) ________________________________________) No. C 07-3786 JF 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055 San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone: (415) 436-7124 FAX: (415) 436-7169

PARTIES' JOINT REQUEST TO BE EXEMPT FROM FORMAL ADR PROCESS

23 Resolution Procedures in the Northern District of California," or the specified portions of the ADR 24 Unit's Internet site , discussed the available dispute resolution 25 options provided by the court and private entities, and considered whether this case might benefit 26 from any of them. Here, the parties agree that referral to a formal ADR process will not be 27 beneficial because this action is limited to plaintiff's request that this Court compel defendants to 28 adjudicate the application for naturalization. Defendants have already requested the FBI expedite Parties' Request to be Exempt from ADR Process C07-3786 JF 1

Case 5:07-cv-03786-JF

Document 4 5

Filed 10/05/2007 10/10/2007

Page 2 of 2

1 the name check so that the application may be processed as soon as possible. Given the substance 2 of the action and the lack of any potential middle ground, ADR will only serve to multiply the 3 proceedings and unnecessarily tax court resources. Accordingly, pursuant to ADR L.R. 3-3(c), 4 the parties request the case be removed from the ADR Multi-Option Program and that they be 5 excused from participating in the ADR phone conference and any further formal ADR process. 6 Dated: October 5, 2007 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Dated: October 5, 2007 14 15 ORDER 16 Pursuant to stipulation and to ADR L. R. 3-3(c), the parties are hereby removed from the ADR 17 Multi-Option Program and are excused from participating in the ADR phone conference and any 18 further formal ADR process. 19 SO ORDERED. 20 21 Dated: 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Parties' Request to be Exempt from ADR Process C07-3786 JF 2 10/10/07 JEREMY FOGEL United States District Judge /s/ MONICA KANE Attorney for Plaintiff /s/ ILA C. DEISS Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendants SCOTT N. SCHOOLS United States Attorney Respectfully submitted,