Free Answer to Complaint - District Court of California - California

Case 5:07-cv-03428-HRL

Document 4

Filed 09/04/2007

Page 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS (SC 9990) United States Attorney JOANN M. SWANSON (CSBN 88143) Chief, Civil Division MELANIE L. PROCTOR (CSBN 228971) [email protected] Assistant United States Attorney 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055 San Francisco, California 94102-3495 Telephone: (415) 436-6730 FAX: (415) 436-6927 Attorneys for Defendants

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN JOSE DIVISION 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 COME NOW the Defendants, by and through their counsel, Scott N. Schools, United States Attorney, and Melanie L. Proctor, Assistant United States Attorney, and in answer to the Plaintiff's Complaint ("Complaint"), set forth the following: 1. The allegations in Paragraph 1 consist entirely of Plaintiff's legal characterizations, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) v. ) ) MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security; EMILIO ) T. GONZALEZ, Director, Citizenship and ) ) Immigration Services; ROSEMARY ) MELVILLE, District Director; FRANK ) SICILIANO, Field Office Director; ROBERT S. MUELLER, Director, Federal ) ) Bureau of Investigation, ) Defendants. ) ) RUSLAN V. BELKIN, No. C 07-3428 HRL

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations, except Defendants admit Plaintiff's application remains pending. 2. 3.
ANSWER C 07-3428 HRL

Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 2. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 3.

Case 5:07-cv-03428-HRL

Document 4

Filed 09/04/2007

Page 2 of 4

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

4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 4. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 5. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 6. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 7. The allegations in Paragraph 8 consist of Plaintiff's legal characterizations, to which

no response is necessary. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations. 9. The allegation in Paragraph 9 consists of Plaintiff's allegation regarding intra-district

assignment, to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegation. 10. The allegations in Paragraph 10 consist of Plaintiff's legal characterizations, to which

no response is necessary. Defendants aver that unless specifically provided by law, aliens have no residence in the United States for venue purposes. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph 10. 11. The allegations in Paragraph 11 consist of Plaintiff's conclusions of law, to which

no response is necessary. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegations. 12. Defendants admit that Plaintiff filed his application for naturalization on June 21,

2005. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegation in Paragraph 12, and on that basis, deny it. 13. 14. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 13. Defendants admit the allegations in Paragraph 14. Defendants aver that any

recommended approval of an application cannot be completed until the requisite background checks are completed.. 15. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 15, and on that basis deny them. 16. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 16, and on that basis deny them. 17. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 17, and on that basis deny them.
ANSWER C 07-3428 HRL

2

Case 5:07-cv-03428-HRL

Document 4

Filed 09/04/2007

Page 3 of 4

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

18.

Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 18, and on that basis deny them. 19. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 19, and on that basis deny them. 20. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 20, and on that basis deny them. 21. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 21, and on that basis deny them. 22. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 22, and on that basis deny them. 23. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 23, and on that basis deny them. 24. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation

in Paragraph 24, and on that basis deny it. 25. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 25, and on that basis deny them. 26. Defendants lack sufficient information to form a belief as to the truth of the

allegations in Paragraph 26, and on that basis deny them. 27. 28. Defendants admit the allegation in Paragraph 27. The allegations in Paragraph 28 consist of Plaintiff's conclusions of law, to which

no response is necessary. To the extent an answer is required, Defendants deny the allegations. 29. 30. 31. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph 29. Defendants deny the allegations in Paragraph 30. The allegation in Paragraph 31 consists of Plaintiff's characterization of this matter,

to which no response is necessary. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny the allegation. 32. The allegations in Paragraph 32 consist of Plaintiff's prayer for relief, to which no

response is necessary. To the extent a response is required, Defendants deny that Plaintiff is entitled
ANSWER C 07-3428 HRL

3

Case 5:07-cv-03428-HRL

Document 4

Filed 09/04/2007

Page 4 of 4

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

to naturalization, deny that he is entitled to attorney's fees, and deny that any further relief is available. AFFIRMATIVE AND/OR OTHER DEFENSES All allegations not here before specifically admitted, denied, or modified, are hereby denied. For further and separate answer, Defendants allege as follows: FIRST DEFENSE The Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action. SECOND DEFENSE The Complaint fails to state a claim against the Defendants upon which relief can be granted. THIRD DEFENSE No acts or omissions by the United States or its employees were the proximate cause of any injury or damages to the Plaintiff. FOURTH DEFENSE At all times alleged in the complaint, Defendants were acting with good faith, with justification, and pursuant to authority. FIFTH DEFENSE The Defendants are processing the application referred to in the Complaint to the extent possible at this time. Accordingly, no relief as prayed for is warranted. WHEREFORE, Defendants pray that Plaintiff takes nothing by reason of his suit herein, that judgment be rendered in favor of Defendants, for costs of suit herein incurred, and for such other and further relief as this court may deem proper. Dated: September 4, 2007 Respectfully submitted, SCOTT N. SCHOOLS United States Attorney /S/ MELANIE L. PROCTOR Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Defendants

ANSWER C 07-3428 HRL

4