Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-05810/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-05810-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael Chertoff
Defendant
Lorena Jasso De Rivera
Plaintiff
Emilio Gonzales
Defendant
David Still
Defendant

Document Text:

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

STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE

C07-5810 PJH 1

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS, SC SBN 9990

United States Attorney

JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143

Assistant United States Attorney

Chief, Civil Division

EDWARD 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

LORENA JASSO DE RIVERA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, Secretary Homeland )

Security; EMILIO GONZALES, USCIS Director; )

DAVID STILL, District Director, DHS, )

)

Defendants. )

 )

No. C 07-5810 PJH

STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE

OF ACTION TO EASTERN DISTRICT OF

CALIFORNIA AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

[28 U.S.C. § 1406(a)]

The plaintiff brought the above-captioned case under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1361, 1651, 2201,

and 5 U.S.C. § 701, alleging that she attended an interview on her adjustment of status application

on September 7, 2004, but the application remains unadjudicated. Plaintiff alleges that defendants

have violated the Administrative Procedures Act by unreasonably delaying the adjudication of her

adjustment of status application, and that she is entitled to a writ of mandamus to compel the

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to adjudicate her application

immediately. 

The plaintiff is a resident of Stockton, California, which is located in the Eastern District of

California. 28 U.S.C. § 84(b). Moreover, the parties agree that the plaintiff’s I-485 application is

being processed in Sacramento, California. Accordingly, venue for this action is proper in the

Case 4:07-cv-05810-PJH Document 5 Filed 12/21/07 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

STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE

C07-5810 PJH 2

Eastern District, but not in this District. 

The parties to this action, by and through their attorneys, hereby stipulate and request of the

Court that this action should be transferred to the Eastern District of California pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1406(a). Section 1406(a) provides:

The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying in venue in the wrong division

or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district

or division in which it could have been brought. 

Because venue is proper only in the Eastern District, the parties believe that the interests of

justice require that this action be transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of California.

In addition, the time for a response to the complaint has not yet run, and in view of the

uncertainty as to when this action will be docketed and assigned to a judge in the Eastern District

of California, the parties further stipulate and request of the Court that the time for the Defendants

to answer, move, plead or otherwise respond to the Complaint should be extended to 40 days after

the date the action is docketed and assigned to a judge in the Eastern District of California.

Date: December 21, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS

United States Attorney

_________/s/_________________

EDWARD OLSEN

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Defendants

__________/s/________________

Date: December 21, 2007 SUZANNE SPORRI

Attorney for Plaintiff

///

///

Case 4:07-cv-05810-PJH Document 5 Filed 12/21/07 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

STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE

C07-5810 PJH 3

ORDER

The foregoing stipulation is approved and this action is hereby transferred to the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of California, the judicial district in which this case

should have been brought. The time for Defendants to answer, move, plead or otherwise respond

to the Plaintiff’s Complaint shall be extended to 40 days after the action is docketed, and a judge

assigned, in the Eastern District of California. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: 

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

12/21/07

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

Case 4:07-cv-05810-PJH Document 5 Filed 12/21/07 Page 3 of 3