Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-04041/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-04041-4/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 The holding of this court is limited to the facts and the particular circumstances

1

underlying the present motion.

ORDER, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

LI WANG and JIANMIN WANG,

Petitioners,

v.

EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, Director of

Citizenship and Immigration Services;

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of

Homeland Security, and MICHAEL

MUKASEY, Attorney General of the

United States

Defendants.

__________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C07-4041 PVT

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

OF THE COURT’S ORDER GRANTING

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND

DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

On December 17, 2007, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment,

denied Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, dismissed the claims against Defendant

Mukasey, and ordered Defendant Chertoff to adjudicate Plaintiff Jianmin Wang’s I-485 petition

within sixty days. 

On December 26, 2007, Defendants filed a Motion for Reconsideration, and requested

leave to file a Cross-Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court 1

stayed its December 17, 2007 Order, and instructed both parties to file cross-oppositions to the

Case 5:07-cv-04041-PVT Document 22 Filed 02/14/08 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

cross-motions for summary judgment in an Order dated January 17, 2008. 

Based on the papers submitted, the Court finds no new material facts or legal authority to

merit modification of its prior Order. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the stay is lifted, however, it is modified such that

Defendant Chertoff is to adjudicate Plaintiff’s I-485 petition within sixty days from the date of

this Order. 

Dated: 2/14/08

____________________________

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:07-cv-04041-PVT Document 22 Filed 02/14/08 Page 2 of 2