Khan v. Kerry

Filing 27

ORDER DISMISSING CASE, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 1/30/15. (napS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2015)

Download PDF
3 ALAN M. KAUFMAN, ESQ. (California State Bar No. 57449) KAUFMAN & KAUFMAN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 220 Montgomery Street, Suite 966 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 956-7770 4 Attorney for Plaintiff 1 2 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 SABIA KHAN ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) JOHN F. KERRY, Secretary of State of the ) United States ) ) Defendant. ) _________________________________________ ) Case No. 4:14-cv-3322-KAW MOTION TO DISMISS; PROPOSED ORDER 14 Plaintiff SABIA KHAN hereby moves for dismissal of the complaint herein. 15 The complaint seeks review of the November 15, 2011 decision of defendant denying the 16 immigrant visa application of plaintiff’s son, Nasir Khan, based on a finding that he was 17 inadmissible under INA §212(a)(6)(E)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(E)(i) because of his efforts to conceal 18 his true age to facilitate the immigration of his brother. Defendant has determined that plaintiff’s 19 son was not in fact inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(E)(i) and issued a new decision on 20 January 28, 2015 (Exhibit 1). As a result, the issues raised in the complaint are now moot. 21 22 Dated: January 29, 2015 Respectfully submitted, 23 s/Alan M. Kaufman ______________________ Alan M. Kaufman Attorney for Plaintiff 24 25 26 27 28 1 1 [PROPOSED] ORDER 2 Pursuant to plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the compliant herein, IT IS SO ORDERED 3 January Signed this 30th day of _____________, 2015 ____ 5 H ER 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 2 hyllis J. n Hamilto LI RT 8 Judge P R NIA NO 7 FO S UNIT ED RT U O ___________________________ HON. PHYLLISRJ.ERED HAMILTON OO D IT IS S U.S. District Judge 6 28 S DISTRICT TE C TA A 4 N F D IS T IC T O R 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?