Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-07884/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-07884-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
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

Justin Fok, Esq., CA State Bar #242272 

Law Offices of Jean D. Chen 

2107 N. First Street, Suite 300 

San Jose, CA 95131 

Telephone: (408) 437-1788 

Facsimile: (408) 437-9788 

Email: jfok@jclawoffice.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

Wen Hong Liu 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

Wen Hong Liu, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 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; 

David Still, San Francisco District Director, 

United States Citizenship and Immigration 

Services; 

Robert S. Mueller III, Director of the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation, 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. C 06-07884 RS 

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 

Parties’ Joint Request for Exemption 

C 06-07884 RS 

1

*E-FILED 7/31/07*

AND ORDER THEREON

Case 5:06-cv-07884-RS Document 15 Filed 07/31/07 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

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. 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: July 19, 2007 __________/s/____________ 

 Justin G. Fok

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

Dated: July 19, 2007 __________/s/_____________ 

 Edward A. Olsen 

 Assistant United States Attorney 

 Attorney for Defendants 

ORDER 

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: ___________________________ 

 Richard Seeborg

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Parties’ Joint Request for Exemption 

C 06-07884 RS 

2

July 31, 2007

Case 5:06-cv-07884-RS Document 15 Filed 07/31/07 Page 2 of 2