Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-03936/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-03936-1/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

Justin Fok, Esq., CA State Bar #242272 

Law Offices of Jean D. Chen 

2107 N. First Street, Suite 400 

San Jose, CA 95131 

Telephone: (408) 437-1788 

Facsimile: (408) 437-9788 

Email: jfok@jclawoffice.com

Attorney for Plaintiff 

Yiming Li 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

Yiming Li, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney 

General, U.S. Department of Justice; 

Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the 

Department of Homeland Security; 

Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of United States 

Citizenship and Immigration Services; 

Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation, 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. C 07-3936 PVT 

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 

Parties’ Joint Request for Exemption 

C 07-3936 PVT 

1

Case 5:07-cv-03936-PVT Document 15 Filed 10/29/07 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

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 the application 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. 

 Respectfully Submitted, 

Dated: October 15, 2007 __________/s/____________ 

 Justin G. Fok

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

Dated: October 15, 2007 _________/s/______________ 

 Melanie L. Proctor 

 Assistant United States Attorney 

 Attorney for Defendants 

ORDER 

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: ___________________________ 

 Patricia V. Trumbull

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Parties’ Joint Request for Exemption 

C 07-3936 PVT 

2

October 29, 2007

Case 5:07-cv-03936-PVT Document 15 Filed 10/29/07 Page 2 of 2