Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01722/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01722-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 8:1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing

---

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

AUDREY B. HEMESATH

Assistant United States Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, California 95814 

Telephone: (916) 554-2729

Attorneys for Defendants

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SUKDEV SINGH BRAR, ) CV 06-cv-F-1722 OWW SMS

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

) DEFENDAN TS ’ SE C O N D

MOTION FOR

Michael Chertoff, et al. ) AN EXTENSION OF TIME IN

) WHICH TO FILE AN ANSWER 

) AND ORDER

Defendants. )

__________________________________________)

Plaintiff has filed a complaint alleging that defendants have failed to timely process his

application for naturalization. Defendants have previouslyrequested one previous extension of time

based on the medical leave of counsel. Defendants respectfully inform the Court that plaintiff Brar’s

application is currently pending clearance by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Since the time of

defendant’s first request for an extension, an expedite request on the security check has been placed

with the FBI. Once the FBI has cleared the application, CIS will resume the processing of the

application in the most expedited manner possible. 

Because plaintiff’s application is currently pending at the FBI, defendants request an

Case 1:06-cv-01722-OWW -SMS Document 17 Filed 04/03/07 Page 1 of 2
extension of time in which to either file an answer to the complaint or a joint motion to dismiss the

case as moot. The typical time frame required by that agency for completion of the name and

background check is 60 days from the date of the expedite request. Defendants therefore request an

extension until May 29, 2007. 

Dated: March 29, 2007 Respectfully Submitted,

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/Audrey Hemesath

Audrey B. Hemesath

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorneys for the Defendants

ORDER

Pursuant to this Motion for an Extension of Time and for the reasons stated therein, IT IS

HEREBY ORDERED that the defendant’s Answer is due on May 29, 2007, and the Scheduling

Conference, currently set for April 20, 2007 is reset to June 29, 2007 at 8:45 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 29, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01722-OWW -SMS Document 17 Filed 04/03/07 Page 2 of 2