Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00296/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00296-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
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

- 1 - 07cv0296

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JIANQIANG YU, Pro Se,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 07cv0296-LAB (RBB)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

DISMISS AND ORDERING

COMPLETION OF SERVICE 

[Dkt No. 6]

vs.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary of the

Department of Homeland Security;

EMILIO GONZALES, Director U.S.

Citizenship and Immigration Services;

CHRISTINA POULOS, Acting Director,

California Service Center, U.S.

Citizenship and Immigration Services;

ROBERT MUELLER, Director Federal

Bureau of Investigation, 

Defendants.

This action seeks judicial intervention in the processing of pro se plaintiff’s application

to adjust his immigration status to lawful permanent resident. The matter is before the court

on defendants’ Motion To Dismiss Or Alternatively to Modify Order to Show Cause,

contending defects in service of the Summons and Complaint deprive the court of personal

jurisdiction over them. Should the court grant plaintiff an additional extension of time to

effect service of process, defendants alternatively request a 60-day extension of the

response deadline set in the court’s September 21, 2007 Order To Show Cause. In his

Opposition, plaintiff disputes he failed to serve the four named individual defendants, with

evidence of service by mail. Dkt No. 9. 

Case 3:07-cv-00296-LAB-RBB Document 13 Filed 12/03/07 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

- 2 - 07cv0296

In their Reply, defendants acknowledge plaintiff appears to have served “all but one

necessary party, the United States Attorney General.” Dkt No. 11,1:22. They provide in

their Motion Points and Authorities, as a courtesy to this pro se plaintiff, the text of

FED.R.CIV.P. (“Rule”) 4(i), setting forth the requirement and the manner of service he must

use to properly comply with his obligation to serve, in addition to those defendants already

served, the Attorney General of the United States in Washington, D.C. Mot. P&A 3 n.1.

Defendants contend they are not authorized to waive required service of process on the U.S.

Attorney General. Defendants propose in their Reply their Rule 12(b)(2) Motion To Dismiss

“be converted into an order requiring Plaintiff to serve the U.S. Attorney General by U.S.

certified mail within the next 30 days to avoid dismissal of the Complaint.” Reply 1:23-25.

In the event that service is perfected and the Complaint is not dismissed, they further

propose to file their responsive pleading to plaintiff’s Complaint on or before

December 17, 2007, a date within 60 days of the October 16, 2007 date plaintiff served the

United States Attorney’s Office for this district. The court finds defendants’ proposals to be

fair and reasonable.

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Plaintiff shall effect service of process on the U.S. Attorney General

consistently with Rule 4(i), as described in defendants’ Motion and Reply papers, and shall

serve and file proof of that service, within 30 days of the date this Order is entered.

2. Assuming plaintiff’s timely and proper completion of service, defendants shall

file their responsive pleadings on or before December 17, 2007. 

3. Should plaintiff fail to effect proper and timely service of process on the U.S.

Attorney General as ordered herein, this action will be dismissed without prejudice upon

notice from defendants to the court of that failure.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 30, 2007

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cv-00296-LAB-RBB Document 13 Filed 12/03/07 Page 2 of 2