Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05638/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05638-1/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

Parties’ Request to be Exempt from ADR 

C07-5638 EDL 1

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO, CSBN 44332

United States Attorney

JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143

Assistant United States Attorney

Chief, Civil Division

MELANIE L. PROCTOR, CSBN 228971

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-6730

FAX: (415) 436-6927

Attorneys for Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

MARYAM MOHSENZADEH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, in his Official Capacity, )

United States Department of Homeland Security; )

PETER D. KEISLER, in his Official Capacity, )

Acting Attorney General, U.S. Department of )

Justice; DAVID N. STILL, in his Official )

Capacity, District Director, United States )

Citizenship and Immigration Services; EMILIO )

GONZALEZ, in his Official Capacity, Director; )

Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, )

)

Defendants. )

________________________________________)

No. C 07-5638 EDL

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

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

Case 3:07-cv-05638-EDL Document 11 Filed 02/08/08 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 

C07-5638 EDL 2

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.

Date: January 22, 2008 Respectfully submitted,

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO

United States Attorney

 /s/ 

MELANIE L. PROCTOR

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendants

Dated: January 22, 2008 _________/s/___________________

NADIA FARAH

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: ___________________________

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE

United States Magistrate Judge

February 8, 2008

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte

Case 3:07-cv-05638-EDL Document 11 Filed 02/08/08 Page 2 of 2