Free Joint Case Management Statement - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02872-BZ

Document 7

Filed 10/18/2007

Page 1 of 4

1 SCOTT N. SCHOOLS, SC SBN 9990 United States Attorney 2 JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143 Chief, Civil Division 3 EDWARD OLSEN, CSBN 214150 Assistant United States Attorney 4 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055 5 San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone: (415) 436-6915 6 FAX: (415) 436-6927 7 Attorneys for Defendants 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 11 AMAR BELLAHA, 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 ALBERTO GONZALES, Attorney General 15 of the United States; MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of the Department of Homeland 16 Security; EMILIO GONZALEZ, Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration 17 Services; ROBERT MUELLER, Director of Federal Bureau of Investigation; 18 CHRISTINA POULOS, Director of the California Service Center, 19 Defendants. 20 21 22 1. Jurisdiction and Service The basis asserted by plaintiff for this Court's jurisdiction is 8 U.S.C. §1447(b), 28 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. C 07-2872 PJH

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT; AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

23 U.S.C. §1331,28 U.S.C. § 361, 5 U.S.C. § 701, and 28 U.S.C. §2201. The parties do not 24 dispute that venue is proper in this district. No issues exist regarding personal jurisdiction, and no 25 parties remain to be served. 26 27 28 2. Facts The plaintiff is a lawful permanent resident of the United States who filed an application for naturalization with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on August 19, 2005. Plaintiff was interviewed by an immigration officer on December 15, 2005. The
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENTS STATEMENT C07-2872 PJH

1

Case 3:07-cv-02872-BZ

Document 7

Filed 10/18/2007

Page 2 of 4

1 plaintiff's application for naturalization is pending. On June 1, 2007, the plaintiff filed this action 2 pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), which provides that if USCIS has not adjudicated a naturalization 3 application within 120 days of examining the applicant, the applicant may ask the District Court 4 for a hearing on his or her naturalization application. The District Court may then either hold an evidentiary hearing on the naturalization application or remand to USCIS with appropriate 5 instructions. 6 3. Legal Issues 7 Whether this Court lacks jurisdiction over the plaintiff's action. 8 Whether this Court should conduct a hearing on plaintiff's application for naturalization or 9 remand plaintiff's application to the agency with instructions to complete his naturalization. 10 11 4. Motions The defendants intend to file a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction/motion to remand

12 this matter to USCIS. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENTS STATEMENT C07-2872 PJH

5. Amendment of Pleadings No parties, claims or defenses are expected to be added or dismissed. 6. Evidence Preservation The parties do not have any evidence that falls within this category. 7. Disclosures The parties believe that the initial disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 do not apply to this case. 8. Discovery The parties do not intend to take any discovery at this time. 9. Class Actions Not applicable. 10. Related Cases The parties are not aware of any related case or cases. 11. Relief The plaintiff asks this Court to adjudicate his naturalization application or, in the alternative, to remand the matter to USCIS with instructions to immediately adjudicate his naturalization application.

2

Case 3:07-cv-02872-BZ

Document 7

Filed 10/18/2007

Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 12. Settlement and ADR The parties intend to promptly file their ADR certification and Notice of Need for ADR

4 phone conference. 13. Consent to Magistrate Judge for All Purposes 5 The parties will consent to the assignment of this case to a magistrate judge. 6 14. Other References: 7 The parties do not believe that this case is suitable for reference to binding arbitration, a 8 special master, or the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. 9 15. Narrowing of Issues 10 The parties do not believe that the issues can be narrowed by agreement or by motion, and 11 do not have suggestions to expedite the presentation of evidence at trial (e.g., through summaries 12 or stipulated facts), and any request to bifurcate issues, claims or defenses. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 16. Expedited Schedule N/A 17. Scheduling Defendants' Motion to Dismiss/Remand: Plaintiff's Opposition: Defendant's Reply: Hearing: 18. Trial The parties do not anticipate the need for a trial in this case. If this Court denies the January 11, 2008 January 25, 2008 February 1, 2008 February 20, 2008 at 9:00 a.m.

21 defendants' motion to dismiss/remand, the parties will ask this Court to set another CMC, at which 22 time the parties will ask this Court to set an evidentiary hearing date on the plaintiff's 23 naturalization application. 19. Disclosure of Non-Party Interested Entities or Persons: 24 The parties intend to file the "Certification of Interested Entities or Persons" required by 25 Civil Local Rule 3-16. 26 20. Such other matters as may facilitate the just, speedy and inexpensive disposition 27 of this matter 28 None.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENTS STATEMENT C07-2872 PJH

3

Case 3:07-cv-02872-BZ

Document 7

Filed 10/18/2007

Page 4 of 4

1 2 3 4 Dated: October 18, 2007 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ORDER The Case Management Statement and Proposed Order are hereby adopted as the Case Dated: October 18, 2007 /s/ EDWARD A. OLSEN Assistant United States Attorney Attorney for Defendants /s/ SHAH PEERALLY Attorney for Plaintiff

15 Management Order for the case and the parties are hereby ordered to comply with this order. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: October ___, 2007 _________________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENTS STATEMENT C07-2872 PJH

4