Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-03573/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-03573-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

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

Case No. C 06-03573 RS

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

*E-FILED 6/27/06*

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

PING YAN,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, et al.,

 Defendants.

Case Number C 06-03573 RS

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On June 5, 2006, plaintiff Ping Yan filed a “Complaint For Writ in the Nature of

Mandamus” against defendants Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland

Security; Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration

Services (“CIS”); Francis D. Siciliano, Officer-in charge of the San Jose Sub Office of the CIS;

Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and Evelyn Upchurch

Acting Director of the Nebraska Service Center of the CIS. 

 Plaintiff alleges defendants have failed to process her two “I-485, Application to

Register Permanent Resident or Adjust Status” in a timely manner, apparently as a result of

delays in processing a security check.

Case 5:06-cv-03573-RS Document 5 Filed 06/27/06 Page 1 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

2

Case No. C 06-03573 RS

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have violated the Administrative Procedures Act, 5

U.S.C § 701 et. seq., by “withholding or unreasonably delaying action on the Plaintiff’s I-485

applications and [by] fail[ing] to carry out the adjudicative functions delegated to them by law.” 

Plaintiff requests that this Court enter an order requiring defendants to complete the security

check and process the case to conclusion. Good cause therefore appearing, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED as follows:

(1) The Clerk of the Court shall serve by certified mail a copy of the petition and a

copy of this Order upon counsel for Defendants, the Office of the United States Attorney. 

(2) Defendants shall, within sixty (60) days after receiving service of the petition, file

and serve upon Plaintiff an answer, showing cause why the relief prayed for should not be

granted. At the time the answer is filed, Defendants shall lodge with the Court all records

relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the complaint. If Defendants contend that

Plaintiff has failed to exhaust administrative remedies as to any ground for relief asserted in the

complaint, Defendants shall specify what administrative remedy remains available to Plaintiff. 

If Defendants waive or concede the issue of exhaustion, Defendants shall so state in their

answer. 

(3) Plaintiff may file a response to the matters raised in the answer within thirty (30)

days after receiving the answer. 

(4) Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the matter will be deemed submitted upon

the filing of the response or upon the expiration of time to file a response.

 (5) No later than the time their respective responses hereunder are due, the parties

shall make their determination regarding the issue of consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate

Judge and file the appropriate form. In the event any party declines to consent to the jurisdiction

of the Magistrate Judge, this action will be reassigned to a District Judge for further proceedings.

Case 5:06-cv-03573-RS Document 5 Filed 06/27/06 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

3

Case No. C 06-03573 RS

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

(6) The Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR deadlines entered

on June 5, 2006 in this action is hereby VACATED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 27, 2006 

RICHARD SEEBORG

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:06-cv-03573-RS Document 5 Filed 06/27/06 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

4

Case No. C 06-03573 RS

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT NOTICE OF THIS ORDER HAS BEEN DELIVERED

TO:

Justin X. Wang lawbw@aol.com

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not

registered for e-filing under the Court's CM/ECF program. 

Dated: 6/27/06 Chambers of Judge Richard Seeborg

By: /s/ BAK 

Case 5:06-cv-03573-RS Document 5 Filed 06/27/06 Page 4 of 4