Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-02589/USCOURTS-cand-5_08-cv-02589-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 465
Nature of Suit: Other Immigration Actions
Cause of Action: 8:1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

Bailun Zhang,

Plaintiff,

 v.

Michael Chertoff,

Defendant. /

NO. C 08-02589 JW 

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S EX

PARTE APPLICATION TO STAY

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT

Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Ex Parte Application to Stay Plaintiff’s Motion for

Summary Judgment. (hereafter, “Motion,” Docket Item No. 8.) Plaintiff has timely filed an

opposition to the motion. (See Docket Item No. 9.)

Defendant requests that the due date for its opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary

Judgment, currently due on October 6, 2008, be extended to thirty days after the Court’s resolution

of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. (See Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction,

Docket Item No. 5.) Defendant contends that further briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary

Judgment should be stayed because the motion will be moot, and resources wasted, if Defendant’s

Motion to Dismiss is granted. 

Plaintiff has timely brought his Motion for Summary Judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). 

Although Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment may become moot, Plaintiff will be prejudiced

by the delay and the need for an additional hearing on his motion if Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss

is denied. Expeditious resolution of this case is more likely if Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary

Judgment is fully briefed and the parties are prepared to present that motion to the Court at the

Case 5:08-cv-02589-JW Document 10 Filed 10/02/08 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

hearing scheduled for October 27, 2008. Thus, without addressing the merits of Defendant’s Motion

to Dismiss, the Court finds that there is not good cause for staying Defendant’s opposition. 

Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendant’s Ex Parte Application to Stay Plaintiff’s

Motion for Summary Judgment.

Dated: October 2, 2008 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

Case 5:08-cv-02589-JW Document 10 Filed 10/02/08 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

Justin X. Wang justin@lawbw.com

Melanie Lea Proctor Melanie.Proctor@usdoj.gov

Dated: October 2, 2008 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: /s/ JW Chambers 

Elizabeth Garcia

Courtroom Deputy

Case 5:08-cv-02589-JW Document 10 Filed 10/02/08 Page 3 of 3