Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02289/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02289-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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 for ADR Exemption

C07-2289 SC 1

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS, SC SBN 9990

United States Attorney

JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143

Assistant United States Attorney

Chief, Civil Division

EDWARD OLSEN, CSBN 214150

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-6915

FAX: (415) 436-6927

Attorneys for Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

NEAK SULTANZAI, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary Homeland )

Security; )

EMILIO GONZALEZ, USCIS Director; )

DAVID STILL, District Director, Department )

of Homeland Security, )

)

Defendants. )

 )

No. C 07-2289 SC

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

adjudicate the application for naturalization. Defendants have already requested the FBI expedite

the name check so that the application may be processed as soon as possible. Given the substance

of the action and the lack of any potential middle ground, ADR will only serve to multiply the

Case 3:07-cv-02289-JL Document 11 Filed 08/27/07 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 for ADR Exemption

C07-2289 SC 2

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.

Date: July 31, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS

United States Attorney

 /s/ 

EDWARD A. OLSEN

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendants

 /s/ 

Date: July 31, 2007 JEFF GRIFFITHS

Attorney for Plaintiff

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.

Date: 

SAMUEL CONTI

United States District Judge

8/27/07

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Samuel Conti

Case 3:07-cv-02289-JL Document 11 Filed 08/27/07 Page 2 of 2