Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02816/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-02816-3/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

Joint Case Management Conference Statement

C07-2816 MEJ 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 FRANCISCO DIVISION

DOAHUA CHEN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of )

Department of Homeland Security; )

EMILIO GONZALES, Director of U.S. )

Citizenship and Immigration Services; )

CHRISTINA POULOS, Acting Director of ) 

California Service Center in U.S. Citizenship and )

Immigration Services; )

ALBERTO GONZALES, United States )

Attorney General, )

)

Defendants. )

 )

No. C 07-2816 MEJ

JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT

STATEMENT and [Proposed] ORDER 

1. Jurisdiction and Service: 

The basis asserted by plaintiff for this Court’s jurisdiction is 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 8 U.S.C. §

1101, 5 U.S.C. § 701 and 28 U.S.C. § 1361. The parties do not dispute that venue is proper in this

district. No issues exist regarding personal jurisdiction or venue, and no parties remain to be

served. 

2. Facts:

Plaintiff filed a Form I-485 application to adjust her status to lawful permanent resident with

Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 12 Filed 12/10/2007 Page 1 of 4

ORDER VACATING CMC

Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 13 Filed 12/10/07 Page 1 of 4
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

Joint Case Management Conference Statement

C07-2816 MEJ 2

the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on or about on June 10, 2005.

The USCIS has not yet adjudicated the Form I-485 application. The Plaintiff filed an action on

May 30, 2007, seeking an order from this Court directing USCIS to adjudicate the Form I-485

application. 

3. Legal Issues: 

Whether this Court should dismiss the Plaintiff’s action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 

If this Court has jurisdiction, whether the USCIS is processing the Plaintiff’s I-485 applications

within a reasonable period of time.

4. Motions: 

The parties intend to file cross-motions for summary judgment.

5. Amendment of Pleadings: 

No parties, claims or defenses are expected to be added or dismissed.

6. Evidence Preservation:

The parties do not have any evidence that falls within this category.

7. Disclosures: 

The parties believe that the initial disclosure requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 do not apply to

this case.

8. Discovery: 

The parties do not intend to take any discovery at this time.

9. Class Actions: 

N/A

10. Related Cases: 

The parties are not aware of any related case or cases.

11. Relief:

The Plaintiff ask this Court to direct USCIS to adjudicate the Form I-485 application.

12. Settlement and ADR: 

The parties’ filed a request to be exempt from formal ADR process on December 3, 2007. 

13. Consent to Magistrate Judge for All Purposes: 

Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 12 Filed 12/10/2007 Page 2 of 4 Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 13 Filed 12/10/07 Page 2 of 4
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

Joint Case Management Conference Statement

C07-2816 MEJ 3

The parties consent to a magistrate judge.

14. Other References:

The parties do not believe that this case is suitable for reference to binding arbitration, a

special master, or the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

15. Narrowing of Issues: 

The parties do not believe that the issues can be narrowed by agreement or by motion, and do

not have suggestions to expedite the presentation of evidence at trial (e.g. through summaries or

stipulated facts), and any request to bifurcate issues, claims or defenses.

16. Expedited Schedule:

The parties believe this case can be resolved on cross-motions for summary judgment.

17. Scheduling:

The parties propose the following schedule on the parties’ cross-motions for summary

judgment:

Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment: January 3, 2008

Cross-Oppositions: January 17, 2008

Hearing: February 7, 2008 at 10:00 a.m.

18. Trial: 

The parties do not anticipate the need for a trial in this case.

19. Disclosure of Non-party Interested Entities or Persons:

None.

20. Such other matters as may facilitate the just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of this

matter.

None.

///

///

Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 12 Filed 12/10/2007 Page 3 of 4 Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 13 Filed 12/10/07 Page 3 of 4
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

Joint Case Management Conference Statement

C07-2816 MEJ 4

Date: December 6, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS

United States Attorney

 /s/ 

ILA C. DEISS

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendants

 /s/ 

Date: December 7, 2007 DOAHUA CHEN

Pro se

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

The Joint Case Management Statement and Proposed Order are hereby adopted by the

Court as the Case Management Order for the case, and the parties are ordered to comply with this

Order.

Date: 

MARIA-ELENA JAMES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 12 Filed 12/10/2007 Page 4 of 4

December 10, 2007

The December 13, 2007 CMC is VACATED.

Case 3:07-cv-02816-MEJ Document 13 Filed 12/10/07 Page 4 of 4