Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-04493/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-04493-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
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

Parties’ Request to be Exempt from ADR Process

C07-4493 RMW 1

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS, SC SBN 9990

United States Attorney

JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143

Assistant United States Attorney

Chief, Civil Division

ILA C. DEISS, NY SBN 3052909

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7124

FAX: (415) 436-7169

Attorneys for Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

BAO CHRIS TU LUU, aka )

BAO TU LUU, aka CHRIS LUU, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL MUKASEY, Attorney General )

of the United States; )

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary, )

Department of Homeland Security; )

DAVID N. STILL, District Director, )

San Francisco, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration )

Services; )

EMILIO GONZALEZ, Director, U.S. )

Citizenship and Immigration Services; )

ROBERT S. MUELLER, III, Director, )

Federal Bureau of Investigation, )

)

Defendants. )

 )

No. C 07-4493 RMW

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

AND ORDER *E-FILED - 12/6/07*

Case 5:07-cv-04493-RMW Document 10 Filed 12/06/07 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 to be Exempt from ADR Process

C07-4493 RMW 2

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 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.

Dated: November 26, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS

United States Attorney

 /s/ 

ILA C. DEISS

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorney for Defendants

Dated: November 26, 2007 /s/ 

GABRIEL D. JACK

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.

Dated: 

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

12/6/07

Case 5:07-cv-04493-RMW Document 10 Filed 12/06/07 Page 2 of 2