Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02816/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02816-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 8:1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing

---

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

Parties’ Request to be Exempt from ADR Process

C07-2816 MEJ 1

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS, SC SBN 9990

United States Attorney

JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143

Assistant United States Attorney

Chief, Civil Division

ILA C. DEISS, NY SBN 3052909

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7124

FAX: (415) 436-7169

Attorneys for Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

DOAHUA CHEN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of )

Department of Homeland Security; )

EMILIO GONZALES, Director of U.S. )

Citizenship and Immigration Services; )

CHRISTINA POULOS, Acting Director of ) 

California Service Center in U.S. Citizenship and )

Immigration Services; )

ALBERTO GONZALES, United States )

Attorney General, )

)

Defendants. )

 )

No. C 07-2816 MEJ

PARTIES’ JOINT REQUEST TO BE

EXEMPT FROM FORMAL ADR

PROCESS

Each of the undersigned certifies that he or she has read either the handbook entitled “Dispute

Resolution Procedures in the Northern District of California,” or the specified portions of the ADR

Unit’s Internet site <www.adr.cand.uscourts.gov>, discussed the available dispute resolution

options provided by the court and private entities, and considered whether this case might benefit

from any of them. 

Here, the parties agree that referral to a formal ADR process will not be beneficial because this

mandamus action is limited to plaintiff’s request that this Court compel defendants to adjudicate

AND ORDER THEREON

Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 11 Filed 12/05/07 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

Parties’ Request to be Exempt from ADR Process

C07-2816 MEJ 2

the applications for adjustment of status. Given the substance of the action and the lack of any

potential middle ground, ADR will only serve to multiply the proceedings and unnecessarily tax

court resources. 

Accordingly, pursuant to ADR L.R. 3-3(c), the parties request the case be removed from the

ADR Multi-Option Program and that they be excused from participating in the ADR phone

conference and any further formal ADR process.

Dated: November 30, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS

United States Attorney

 /s/ 

ILA C. DEISS

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorney for Defendants

Dated: November 30, 2007 /s/ 

DOAHUA CHEN

Pro se

ORDER

Pursuant to stipulation and to ADR L. R. 3-3(c), the parties are hereby removed from the

ADR Multi-Option Program and are excused from participating in the ADR phone conference and

any further formal ADR process.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: 

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

U

United States District Judge

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

Judge Maria-Elena James

December 5, 2007

Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 11 Filed 12/05/07 Page 2 of 2