Vohra v. Still

Full title: Deep Kumar VOHRA, Petitioner, v. David STILL, in his Official Capacity…

Court: United States District Court, N.D. California, Oakland Division

Date published: Sep 19, 2005

No. C 05-02723 SBA (N.D. Cal. Sep. 19, 2005)

Opinion

No. C 05-02723 SBA.

September 19, 2005

Marc Van Der Hout (California Bar # 80778), Zachary Nightingale (California Bar #184501), Van Der Hout, Brigagliano Nightingale, LLP, San Francisco, California, Attorneys for Petitioner, Deep Kumar VOHRA.

Edward Olsen, Assistant United States Attorney, Attorney for Respondents.

STIPULATED MOTION FOR VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND ORDER

SAUNDRA ARMSTRONG, District JudgePage 2

On July 1, 2005, Petitioner filed a Petition for Review pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1447(b), Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") § 336(b), seeking de novo judicial review of his application for naturalization, requesting that the Court grant his application for naturalization or, alternatively, order that a hearing take place in this matter, as Petitioner's application remained unadjudicated more than 120 days after the date of the naturalization examination.

Counsel for Respondents is informed that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ("CIS") is prepared to adjudicate Petitioner's naturalization application within 30 days of the dismissal of this action. Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit's decision in United States v. Hovsepian, 359 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 2004), the CIS loses jurisdiction to adjudicate the naturalization application of an alien who has a petition for de novo review of that application pending before the District Court. Hovsepian, 359 F. 3d at 1162-1163; see also Bellajaro v. Schiltgen, 378 F.3d 1042, 1046 (9th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, the parties hereby request that this Court dismiss the pending petition to allow the CIS to adjudicate Petitioner's application for naturalization within 30 days of the dismissal, as Petitioner's application has been pending for approximately eighteen months since the date of his naturalization interview. The parties request the dismissal occur without prejudice to allow the Petitioner to file a new petition should the CIS again fail to timely adjudicate the application or should the application be denied.

Each of the parties shall bear their own costs and fees.

______/s/___________ Edward Olsen

Assistant United States Attorney Attorney for Respondents

I declare under penalty of perjury that concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from Edward Olsen.

Dated: September 15, 2005 _______/s/___________ Marc Van Der Hout

Pursuant to stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.