Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-04552/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-04552-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 8:287 Petition to Enforce INS Subpoena

---

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’ Joint Request to be Exempt from ADR Process

C 07-4552 PJH 1

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS, SC SBN 9990

United States Attorney

JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143

Assistant United States Attorney

Chief, Civil Division

EDWARD A. OLSEN, CSBN 214150

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-6915

FAX: (415) 436-6927

Attorneys for Defendants

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

HATIM FARAZDAQ BADRUDDIN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

ALBERTO GONZALES, Attorney General of )

the United States; MICHAEL CHERTOFF, )

Secretary of the Department of Homeland )

Security; EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, Director, )

Citizenship and Immigration Services; )

CHRISTINA POULOS, Acting Director, )

Citizenship and Immigration Services, )

California Service Center; DAVID N. STILL, )

District Director, Citizenship and Immigration )

Services; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT )

OF JUSTICE; UNITED STATES )

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; )

UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND )

IMMIGRATION SERVICES, )

)

Defendants. )

 )

No. C 07-4552 PJH

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. 

Case 4:07-cv-04552-PJH Document 6 Filed 11/28/07 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

Parties’ Joint Request to be Exempt from ADR Process

C 07-4552 PJH 2

Here, the parties agree that referral to a formal ADR process will not be beneficial because this

action is limited to Plaintiff’s request that this Court compel defendants to adjudicate the

application for naturalization. Defendants have already requested the FBI expedite the name check

so that the application may be processed as soon as possible. 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. 

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: November 26, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS

United States Attorney

 /s/ 

EDWARD A. OLSEN

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorney for Defendants

Dated: November 26, 2007 _________/s/__________________

FAKHRUDEEN HUSSAIN

Attorney for Plaintiff

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: ___________________________

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

11/28/07

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

Case 4:07-cv-04552-PJH Document 6 Filed 11/28/07 Page 2 of 2