Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04633/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04633-0/pdf.json

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

Parties’ Joint Request to be Exempt from ADR Process

C 07-4633 CRB 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

CHUNNU MOHAMMED, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

ROBIN L. BARRETT, Field Office Director, )

USCIS San Francisco District Office; )

EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, Director, USCIS; )

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; )

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary, Department )

of Homeland Security; )

ROBERT S. MUELLER, Director, )

Federal Bureau of Investigations; )

ALBERTO GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General, ) 

)

Defendants. )

 )

No. C 07-4633 CRB

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 plaintiff’s request that this Court compel defendants to adjudicate

Case 3:07-cv-04633-CRB 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 07-4633 CRB 2

the 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. 

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

Attorneys for Defendants

Dated: November 26, 2007 _________/s/_________________

ROBERT B. JOBE

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: ___________________________

CHARLES R. BREYER

United States District Judge

November 27, 2007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Charles R. Breyer

Case 3:07-cv-04633-CRB Document 6 Filed 11/28/07 Page 2 of 2