Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00987/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00987-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
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

1

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

AUDREY B. HEMESATH

Assistant United States Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, California 95814 

Telephone: (916) 554-2729

Attorneys for Respondents

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Kulbri Singh BRAR, ) CV 05-F-0987 AWI SMS

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

) JOINT STIPULATION AND 

Michael CHERTOFF, Department of ) ORDER

Homeland Security, et al. )

)

Respondents. )

__________________________________________)

Petitioner and respondents hereby stipulate that the above-captioned case be remanded to

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) for the purpose of adjudication of

petitioner’s naturalization application. 

On August 1, 2005, petitioner filed a Complaint for Declaratory Judgment of Naturalization

under 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b) & 1421(c). Petitioner asks this Court to adjudicate his Form N-400

Application for Naturalization. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §

1447(b), which provides:

If there is a failure to make a determination under section 1446 of this title before the end of

the 120-day period after the date on which the examination is conducted under such section,

the applicant may apply to the United States district court in which the applicant resides for

a hearing on the matter. Such court has jurisdiction over the matter and may either determine

the matter or remand the matter, with appropriate instructions, to the Service to determine

the matter.

8 U.S.C. § 1447(b). Under the statute, the Court has two options: to “determine the matter” or to

Case 1:05-cv-00987-AWI -SMS Document 16 Filed 10/03/05 Page 1 of 3
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

2

“remand the matter, with appropriate instructions, to the Service to determine the matter.” See

United States v. Hovsepian , 359 F.3d 1144, 1160 (9th Cir. 2004). 

In the instant case, the Fresno branch office of CIS received from Washington, D.C., the

completed name check report on September 21, 2005 from the Federal Bureau of Investigations. The

return of the name check report enables CIS to now complete the process of administrative

adjudication of petitioner’s application, including the oath and presentation of certificate of

naturalization. In the event CIS does not adjudicate the application within 45 days of the order of

remand, jurisdiction would revert to the district court to determine the matter per 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b).

A remand would not preclude the filing of a subsequent district court action by petitioner in the event

that CIS should deny the application. See 8 U.S.C. § 1421(c). 

Dated: September 29, 2005 Respectfully Submitted,

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Audrey B. Hemesath

Audrey B. Hemesath

Assistant U.S. Attorney

/s/ James Makasian

2300 Tulare Street, Suite 250

Fresno, CA 93721

Case 1:05-cv-00987-AWI -SMS Document 16 Filed 10/03/05 Page 2 of 3
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

3

ORDER

Pursuant to this Joint Stipulation and for the reasons stated therein, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that the petition be REMANDED to Citizenship and Immigration Services with

instructions to adjudicate the Application within forty-five (45) days of the Order of Remand. The

Court DISMISSES petitioner’s action without prejudice. Each party shall bear its own costs, fees

and expenses.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 30, 2005 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00987-AWI -SMS Document 16 Filed 10/03/05 Page 3 of 3