Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-02188/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-02188-5/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

FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

C 07-2188 WDB

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO, CSBN 44332

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 Respondents

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

QIN CHEN, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary )

of Department of Homeland Security; )

EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, Director of the )

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; )

CHRISTINA POULOS, Acting Director of )

USCIS, California Service Center; and )

ROBERT S. MULLER, Director )

of Federal Bureau of Investigation, )

)

Respondents. ) 

No. C 07-2188-WDB

FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT

STATEMENT AND SECOND REQUEST

TO EXTEND THE DATE OF THE CASE

MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; AND 

ORDER

The petitioner, currently proceeding pro se, and respondents, by and through their attorneys of

record, hereby jointly submit this further case management statement.

(1) On April 20, 2007, the petitioner filed this mandamus action, seeking an order compelling

the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to adjudicate her I-485 application

to adjust her status to lawful permanent resident.

(2) The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment.

(3) On December 11, 2007, this Court issued an order: (a) stating that if this case is not

rendered moot by agency action during the first few months of 2008, the Court denies the

Case 4:07-cv-02188-WDB Document 27 Filed 03/13/08 Page 1 of 3
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

In the parties’ stipulation to continue the case management conference, counsel for the

respondents erroneously referred to the February Visa Bulletin, instead of the March Visa

Bulletin.

FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

C 07-2188 WDB

respondents’ motion for summary judgment; (b) declining to rule on petitioner’s motion for

summary judgment; (c) inviting the parties to engage in discovery on the issue of whether

petitioner is in a group that is eligible for a visa now; (d) informing the petitioner that she may file

a motion for summary judgment on this issue at any time before February 11, 2008, if she has

developed sufficient evidence to support such a motion; (e) stating that if the petitioner has not

filed a motion for summary judgment by February 11, 2008, and if USCIS has not by then made a

decision on the I-485 application, then by February 19, 2008, the parties shall file a joint case

management statement that apprises the Court of any relevant developments that have occurred

between the date of the Court’s order and now; (f) stating that if the petitioner’s group is eligible

for visas, or is about to become eligible for visas, it would issue a ruling on the pending motion for

summary judgment; and (g) stating that if it is not clear whether petitioner’s group is eligible for

visas, then on February 26, 2008, the Court would conduct a case management conference.

(4) On February 21, 2008, this Court granted the parties’ stipulation to extend the date of the

case management conference from February 26, 2008, to March 17, 2008.

(5) The petitioner has not propounded any discovery nor filed a motion for summary judgment.

(6) The respondents continue to maintain that the petitioner is in the Second Preference

Category, for which visas are not currently available.

(7) The State Department’s January Visa Bulletin stated that the priority date for Second

Preference Chinese applicants will be January 1, 2003.

(8) The State Department’s February Visa Bulletin stated that the priority date for Second

Preference Chinese applicants will still be January 1, 2003.

(9) The State Department’s March Visa Bulletin1

 stated that the priory date for Second

Preference Chinese applicants will be December 1, 2003, an encouraging jump of 11 months.

(10) The parties expect the State Department’s April Visa Bulletin to be posted on the

Department of State’s website any day.

(11) The parties will promptly advise the Court when the State Department’s April Visa

Case 4:07-cv-02188-WDB Document 27 Filed 03/13/08 Page 2 of 3
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

FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

C 07-2188 WDB

Bulletin is posted and what that bulletin has to say about the priority date for Second Preference

Chinese applicants.

(12) The parties ask this Court to delay ruling on petitioner’s motion for summary judgment

and to await information on plaintiff’s availability for a visa in the State Department’s April Visa

Bulletin.

(13) The parties respectfully ask this Court to again continue the case management conference,

this time until April 21, 2008, at 1:30 p.m. 

 Dated: March 12, 2008 Respectfully submitted,

JOSEPH R. RUSSONIELLO

United States Attorney

/s/

EDWARD A. OLSEN

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Respondents 

Dated: March 12, 2008 /s/

QIN CHEN

Petitioner

ORDER

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 3/13/08 

 WAYNE D. BRAZIL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:07-cv-02188-WDB Document 27 Filed 03/13/08 Page 3 of 3