Hashem v. Still et al
Filing
14
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on 10/26/11. (klhS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2011)
9
TONY WEST
Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division
DAVID J. KLINE
Director
J. MAX WEINTRAUB (VA 36188)
Senior Litigation Counsel
LANA L. VAHAB (DC 976203)
Trial Attorney
United States Department of Justice
Civil Division
Office of Immigration Litigation
District Court Section
P.O. Box 868, Ben Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044
Tel: (202) 532-4067
Fax: (202) 305-7000
Email: lana.vahab@usdoj.gov
10
Attorneys for Defendants
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
AMNAR NAZIH HASHEM,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
DAVID STILL,
)
District Director of the United States
)
Citizenship and Immigration Services,
)
San Francisco District Office, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)
No. C 3:11-cv-2974
JOINT STIPULATION DISMISSING
THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
22
23
24
25
JOINT STIPULATION DISMISSING THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Through their respective counsel, the parties agree and stipulate as follows:
Defendant United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) is ready to
26
adjudicate Plaintiff Amnar Nazih Hashem’s (“Plaintiff’s”) adjustment of status application (“I-
27
485”). To that end, USCIS mailed Plaintiff a Referral for FD 258 Fingerprints notice (“Notice”)
28
on October 19, 2011. The Notice asks Plaintiff to appear at the Santa Ana, California office of
JOINT STIPULATION DISMISSING THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Case No. C 3:11-cv-2974
1
USCIS for fingerprinting between October 19, 2011, and November 21, 2011 (the “scheduled
2
period”). Plaintiff agrees to appear for, and submit to, fingerprinting during this scheduled
3
period and to cooperate with USCIS to facilitate a timely adjudication of his application. USCIS
4
agrees to adjudicate Plaintiff’s I-485 within 60 days of Plaintiff’s submission of fingerprints.
5
Accordingly, the parties jointly stipulate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
6
41(a)(1)(A)(ii) to dismissal of this action without prejudice. The parties agree that Plaintiff may
7
reopen this action, upon filing notice thereof, in the event that USCIS has not adjudicated his I-
8
485 within 60 days of his submitting to fingerprinting during the scheduled period. The parties
9
further agree that if Plaintiff does not reopen this action within the period described above, the
10
Court will dismiss the action with prejudice.
11
The parties agree that, in the event that Plaintiff reopens this action in accordance with
12
this stipulated dismissal, Defendants shall respond to the Complaint within fifteen days of
13
reopening.
14
The parties further agree to bear their own fees and costs related to this litigation.
15
16
DATED: October 21, 2011
Respectfully submitted,
17
/s/Marc Alan Karlin (with consent) /s/Lana Lunskaya Vahab
18
MARC ALAN KARLIN
Karlin & Karlin
3701 Wilshire Blvd.
Suite 1035
Los Angeles, CA 90010
213-365-1555
Fax: 213-383-1166
karlinlaw@msn.com
23
LANA LUNSKAYA VAHAB
Trial Attorney
United States Department of Justice
Civil Division
Office of Immigration Litigation
District Court Section
P.O. Box 868, Ben Franklin Station
Washington, D.C. 20044
Tel: (202) 532-4067
Fax: (202) 305-7000
E-mail: lana.vahab@usdoj.gov
24
Counsel for Defendants
19
20
21
22
Counsel for Plaintiff
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION DISMISSING THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
2
Case No. C 3:11-cv-2974
[Proposed] ORDER
1
2
PURSUANT TO THE FOREGOING STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
3
Date: 10/26/11
DISTRI
RT
7
se
Judge Jo
ER
9
A
H
8
R NIA
pero
ph C. S
NO
6
FO
5
LI
4
UNIT
ED
S
RT
U
O
CT
ES
____________________________________
C
AT
T
THE HONORABLE JOSEPH C. SPERO
United States Magistrate Judge
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
JOINT STIPULATION DISMISSING THE ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE
3
Case No. C 3:11-cv-2974
C
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?