Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-03011/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-03011-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

1

*E-FILED 11/13/07*

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

RICK BREWSTER, et al., 

Plaintiffs,

 v.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, et al.,

Defendants. /

NO. C 07-03011 RS

ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO

CONDUCT DISCOVERY,

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

On October 16, 2007, the Court issued an order clarifying that discovery in this action is not

presently open, but providing plaintiffs an opportunity to file a brief setting forth any reasons they

believe discovery should be permitted prior to hearing the cross-motions for summary judgment that

the Court directed the parties to file in its order of September 19, 2007. Plaintiffs have responded

that the discovery they are seeking is relevant to the issues presented in this action and have

articulated reasons they believe that to be so. Plaintiffs have not, however, identified any reason that

this case differs from numerous other cases resolved in this District on summary judgment without

prior discovery proceedings. See, e.g., Dong v. Chertoff, 2007 WL 2601107 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 6,

2007) (holding delay in processing I-485 application of close to two years unreasonable as a matter

of law); Gelder v. Chertoff, 2007 WL 902382 at *3 (N.D. Cal. March 22, 2007) (holding that a more

than two year delay in processing unreasonable as a matter of law); Clayton v. Chertoff, 2007 WL

2904049 at * 6 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 1, 2007) (recognizing that courts within the district have adopted two

years as an unreasonable amount of time.).

Case 5:07-cv-03011-RS Document 25 Filed 11/13/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY

C 07-03011 RS

2

 Under the circumstances, plaintiffs have not shown that it would be appropriate to permit

discovery at this juncture. This ruling is without prejudice should it subsequently appear that

discovery is necessary to resolve the issues presented by the parties’ cross-motions for summary

judgment. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 13, 2007 

RICHARD SEEBORG

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:07-cv-03011-RS Document 25 Filed 11/13/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO CONDUCT DISCOVERY

C 07-03011 RS

3

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT NOTICE OF THIS ORDER HAS BEEN GIVEN TO:

Ila Casy Deiss ila.deiss@usdoj.gov, tiffani.chiu@usdoj.gov

Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not

registered for e-filing under the Court's CM/ECF program. 

AND A COPY OF THIS ORDER WAS MAILED TO:

Rick G Brewster

1513 Flamingo Way

Sunnyvale, CA 94087

Daomin Yang

1513 Flamingo Way

Sunnyale, CA 94087

Dated: 11/13/07 Chambers of Judge Richard Seeborg

By: /s/ BAK 

Case 5:07-cv-03011-RS Document 25 Filed 11/13/07 Page 3 of 3