Chen v. Gonzales et al Doc.

3
Case 5:07-cv-00312-RS Document 3 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of 4

1
2
3
4 *E-FILED 1/22/07*
5
6
7
8
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
SAN JOSE DIVISION
12
13
YU CHEN AND BIN ZHU, Case Number C 07-00312 RS
14
Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
15
v.
16
ALBERTO GONZALES, et al.,
17
Defendants.
18
19
20 On January 17, 2007, plaintiffs Yu Chen and Bin Zhu, appearing through counsel, filed a
21 “Complaint For Mandamus” against defendant Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the
22 United State, and other government officials in their official capacities. Plaintiffs allege
23 defendants have failed to process their I-485 applications in a timely manner, apparently as a
24 result of delays in obtaining completed background check clearances from the Federal Bureau of
25 Investigation. Plaintiffs allege that, as a result, defendants have violated the Administrative
26 Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C § 701 et. seq. Plaintiffs request that this Court enter an order
27 compelling defendants to act upon their applications. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY
28

Case No. C 07-00312 RS

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Dockets.Justia.com
 Case 5:07-cv-00312-RS Document 3 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 2 of 4

1 ORDERED as follows:
2 (1) The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of the complaint and a copy of this
3 Order upon counsel for Defendants, the Office of the United States Attorney. The Clerk of the
4 Court also shall serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiffs’ counsel.
5 (2) Defendants shall, within sixty (60) days after receiving service of the complaint,
6 file and serve upon Plaintiffs an answer, showing cause why the relief prayed for should not be
7 granted. At the time the answer is filed, Defendants shall lodge with the Court all records
8 relevant to a determination of the issues presented by the complaint. If Defendants contend that
9 Plaintiffs have failed to exhaust administrative remedies as to any ground for relief asserted in
10 the complaint, Defendants shall specify what administrative remedy remains available to
11 Plaintiffs. If Defendants waive or concede the issue of exhaustion, Defendants shall so state in
12 their answer.
13 (3) Plaintiffs may file a response to the matters raised in the answer within twenty
14 (20) days after receiving the answer.
15 (4) Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the matter will be deemed submitted upon
16 the filing of the response or upon the expiration of time to file a response.
17 (5) No later than the time their respective responses hereunder are due, the parties
18 shall make their determination regarding the issue of consent to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate
19 Judge and file the appropriate form. In the event any party declines to consent to the jurisdiction
20 of the Magistrate Judge, this action will be reassigned to a District Judge for further proceedings.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No. C 07-00312 RS
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
 Case 5:07-cv-00312-RS Document 3 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 3 of 4

1 (6) The Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR deadlines dated
2 January 17, 2007, in this action is hereby VACATED.
3 IT IS SO ORDERED.
4 Dated: January 22, 2007
RICHARD SEEBORG
5 United States Magistrate Judge
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Case No. C 07-00312 RS
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
 Case 5:07-cv-00312-RS Document 3 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 4 of 4

1 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT NOTICE OF THIS ORDER WAS ELECTRONICALLY

PROVIDED TO:
2
Tricia Xiaoxia Wang tricia@wangslaw.com
3
4 Counsel are responsible for distributing copies of this document to co-counsel who have not
registered for e-filing under the court’s CM/ECF program.
5
6 Dated: January 22, 2007
7
8 /s/ BAK
Chambers of Magistrate Judge Richard Seeborg
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Case No. C 07-00312 RS
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE