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)

Download PDF
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?