Free Answer to Complaint - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-05091-EMC

Document 5

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 1 of 5

1 SCOTT N. SCHOOLS, SC SBN 9990 United States Attorney 2 JOANN M. SWANSON, CSBN 88143 Assistant United States Attorney 3 Chief, Civil Division ILA C. DEISS, NY SBN 3052909 4 Assistant United States Attorney 5 6 7 Attorneys for Respondents 8 9 10 11 12 OMID SAADATI, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 The Respondents hereby submit their answer to Petitioner's Petition for Naturalization. INTRODUCTION 1. Paragraph One consists of Petitioner's characterization of this action for which no answer is UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION ) ) No. C 07-5091 EMC Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) ANSWER MICHAEL CHERTOFF, in his Official ) Capacity, Secretary, United States Department ) of Homeland Security, ) PETER KEISLER, in his Official Capacity, ) Attorney General, United States Department ) of Justice; ) EMILIO GONZALEZ, in his Official Capacity, ) Director, United States Citizenship and ) Immigration Services, United States Department ) of Homeland Security; ) GERARD HEINAUER, in his Official Capacity, ) Director, Nebraska Service Center, United States ) Citizenship and Immigration Services, United ) States Department of Homeland Security, ) Lincoln, Nebraska, ) ) Respondents. ) ________________________________________) 450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055 San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone: (415) 436-7124 FAX: (415) 436-7169

28 necessary; however, to the extent a response is deemed to be required, the Respondents deny the ANSWER C07-5091 EMC 1

Case 3:07-cv-05091-EMC

Document 5

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 2 of 5

1 allegations in this paragraph. 2 2. Paragraph Two consists of Petitioner's characterization of this action for which no answer

3 is necessary; however, to the extent a response is deemed to be required, the Respondents deny the 4 allegations in this paragraph. 5 6 3. Respondents admit the allegations in Paragraph Three. 4. Respondents deny the first sentence in Paragraph Four. Respondents are without sufficient

7 information to admit or deny the remaining allegations in this paragraph. 8 5. Respondents admit that USCIS has not adjudicated Petitioner's application; however,

9 Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the remaining allegations in this 10 paragraph. 11 12 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. Paragraph Six consists of Petitioner's allegation regarding jurisdiction, to which no

13 responsive pleading is required; however, to the extent a responsive pleading is deemed necessary, 14 Respondents deny the allegations in this paragraph. 15 7. Paragraph Seven consists of Petitioner's allegation regarding jurisdiction, to which no

16 responsive pleading is required. 17 8. Paragraph Eight consists of Petitioner's allegations regarding venue, to which no responsive

18 pleading is required; however, to the extent a responsive pleading is deemed necessary, 19 Respondents deny the allegations in this paragraph. 20 8. The allegations contained in Paragraph Eight consist solely of Petitioner's allegations

21 regarding intradistrict assignment for which no answer is necessary. 22 23 PARTIES 9. Respondents admit the allegations in Paragraph Seven; however, Respondents are without

24 sufficient information to admit or deny Petitioner's residence. 25 26 10. Respondents admit the allegations in Paragraph Ten. 11. Respondents admit the allegations in Paragraph Eleven, except that the Attorney General

27 is now Michael Mukasey. 28 12. Respondents admit the allegations in Paragraph Twelve. ANSWER C07-5091 EMC 2

Case 3:07-cv-05091-EMC

Document 5

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 3 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

13. Respondents admit the allegation in Paragraph Thirteen. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 14. Respondents admit the allegation in Paragraph Fourteen. 15. Respondents admit the allegation in Paragraph Fifteen. 16. Respondents admit the allegation in Paragraph Sixteen. 17. Respondents admit the allegation in Paragraph Seventeen. 18. Respondents deny the allegations in Paragraph Eighteen as the Petitioner was interviewed,

8 not examined on December 18, 2003. 9 10 11 19. Respondents admit that Petitioner passed his English and Civics tests at the interview. 20. Respondents deny the allegations in Paragraph Twenty. 21. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

12 Paragraph Twenty-One. 13 22. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

14 Paragraph Twenty-Two. 15 23. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

16 Paragraph Twenty-Three. 17 24. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

18 Paragraph Twenty-Four. 19 25. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

20 Paragraph Twenty-Five. 21 22 23 26. Respondents admit the allegations in Paragraph Twenty-Six. 27. Respondents admit the allegations in Paragraph Twenty-Seven. 28. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

24 Paragraph Twenty-Eight. 25 29. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

26 Paragraph Twenty-Nine. 27 30. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

28 Paragraph Thirty. ANSWER C07-5091 EMC 3

Case 3:07-cv-05091-EMC

Document 5

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 4 of 5

1

31. Respondents are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in

2 Paragraph Thirty-One. 3 4 CAUSE OF ACTION 32. Respondents incorporate their responses to Paragraph One through Thirty-One as if set

5 forth fully herein. 6 7 8 33. Respondents deny the allegations in Paragraph Thirty-Three. PRAYER FOR RELIEF The remaining paragraph consist of Petitioner's prayer for relief, to which no admission or

9 denial is required; to the extent a responsive pleading is deemed to be required, Respondents deny 10 this paragraph. 11 12 13 14 15 16 FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Complaint fails to state a claim against the Respondents upon which relief can be granted. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE No acts or omissions by the United States or its employees were the proximate cause of any

17 injury or damages to the Petitioner. 18 19 FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE At all times alleged in the complaint, Respondents were acting with good faith, with

20 justification, and pursuant to authority. 21 22 FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The Respondents are processing the application referred to in the Petition to the extent possible

23 at this time. Accordingly, no relief as prayed for is warranted. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 28 ANSWER C07-5091 EMC 4

Case 3:07-cv-05091-EMC

Document 5

Filed 12/10/2007

Page 5 of 5

1 2

WHEREFORE, Respondents pray for relief as follows: That judgment be entered for Respondents and against Petitioner, dismissing Petitioner's

3 Petition with prejudice; that Petitioner takes nothing; and that the Court grant such further relief as 4 it deems just and proper under the circumstances. 5 Dated: December 7, 2007 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANSWER C07-5091 EMC 5 /s/ ILA C. DEISS Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Respondents Respectfully submitted, SCOTT N. SCHOOLS United States Attorney