UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
August 3, 2007
ALIREZA GHAZIZAHEDI, PETITIONER,
ROSEMARY MELVILLE, DISTRICT DIRECTOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT; EMILIO T. GONZALEZ, DIRECTOR OF U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES; MICHAEL CHERTOFF, U.S. SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY, RESPONDENTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Patricia V. Trumbull United States Magistrate Judge
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 , 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 action is limited to petitioner's request that this Court adjudicate or compel respondents to adjudicate the application for naturalization. Respondents 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: July 31, 2007
ROBERT BAIZER Attorney for Petitioner
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.
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.