Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-04976/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-04976-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 465
Nature of Suit: Other Immigration Actions
Cause of Action: 08:1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

ARTURO DEVESA VILLANUEVA,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et 

al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 5:14-cv-04976-HRL

ORDER FOR REASSIGNMENT TO A 

DISTRICT JUDGE

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

RE DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO 

PROSECUTE

Plaintiff filed this action on November 10, 2014. There is no indication that any of the 

defendants have been served, and the time for effecting service has long since passed. There has 

been little activity on the docket since the complaint was filed. Additionally, plaintiff’s counsel, 

who apparently is a Washington state attorney, has not applied for pro hac vice admission as 

required by Civil Local Rule 11-3.

This court issued an order directing plaintiff to file a status report by July 1, 2016. (Dkt. 

10). No status report was filed.

This court then issued an order directing plaintiff to show cause why this case should not 

be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to follow court orders. (Dkt. 11). Plaintiff’s show 

cause response was due by July 15, 2016. No response has been filed.

Because not all parties have consented to the undersigned’s jurisdiction, this court 

Case 5:14-cv-04976-EJD Document 12 Filed 07/19/16 Page 1 of 3
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to reassign this case to a District Judge. The undersigned further 

RECOMMENDS that the newly assigned judge dismiss this action for plaintiff’s failure to 

prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. Any party may serve and file objections to this 

Report and Recommendation within fourteen days after being served. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 19, 2016

HOWARD R. LLOYD

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:14-cv-04976-EJD Document 12 Filed 07/19/16 Page 2 of 3
3

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

5:14-cv-04976-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to:

Carllene Marva Placide placide@placidelaw.com

Case 5:14-cv-04976-EJD Document 12 Filed 07/19/16 Page 3 of 3