Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05359/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-05359-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question

---

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 Process

C07-5359 MMC 1

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO, CSBN 44332

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 Defendant

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

HARI SINGH SANDHU and )

SHARANJIT KAUR, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. )

)

ROSEMARY MELVILLE, District Director, )

United States Citizenship and Immigration )

Services, )

)

Defendant. )

 )

No. C 07-5359 MMC

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

mandamus action is limited to Plaintiffs’ request that this Court compel Defendant to adjudicate

Plaintiff Sandhu’s application for adjustment of status. 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.

; ORDER

Case 3:07-cv-05359-MMC Document 12 Filed 01/14/08 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

Parties’ Request to be Exempt from ADR Process

C07-5359 MMC 2

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.

Dated: January 10, 2008 Respectfully submitted,

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO

United States Attorney

 /s/

ILA C. DEISS

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorney for Defendant

Dated: January 10, 2008 /s/

JONATHAN KAUFMAN

Attorney for Plaintiffs

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:

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge

January 14, 2008

Case 3:07-cv-05359-MMC Document 12 Filed 01/14/08 Page 2 of 2