Anyone with a lawsuit against USCIS or thinking about a lawsuit (Merged)

lenaf said:
I broke down and filed 1447(b) today in N.CA district. It went well and very fast - i had all the copies and the summons ready. So the clerk just stamped everything and gave me back some additional papers. I'm yet to read those papers tonight after work. I'm planning to send summons tomorrow morning.
Click to expand...

Hi lenaf me too i just filed 1447(b) yesterday.i already send summons to the defendants today. Big thanks to lotechguy he helps me a lot
 
Slow_CIS said:
Are you keeping the most updated list available to the members of this thread? If so, could you please send me the link?
Click to expand...

lazy and slow, I haven't done anything more in the original list. Here's what I've been doing instead. I have access to lexisnexis through my university. So I do a search for "chertoff" in the past week and look I485 opinions. So far I have 30 MTD Denied, 26 MTD Granted and 2 MSJ's granted in the past 3 months or so. I will upload the August documents in a few minutes. if there wasn't a MTD granted/denied/msj granted/denied we probably are not even interested in the case.
 
Most funniest response to Defendant's MSJ

I fell laughing out of my chair reading this. He did win to a large part...
 
AGC4ME said:
Filing a WOM doesn't ensure automatic expedite or SR. The AUSA will try to get your case dismissed and only after he fails and the Judge instructs him to make sure your case is adjudicated within x days will they write the check for "expedited name check". If you GC is based on employment USCIS doesn't have much by way of rejecting your 485 as sort of punishing you for filing WOM. If yours is a marriage based GC then they can deny your 485 based on your marriage not being in good faith grounds. I couldn't think of any case where 485 was denied because the applicant filed WOM.
Click to expand...

Hi AGC4ME,

Congressional Nebraska's reply to Senator which the Senator forwarded to me says my FBI Namecheck is completed and background check is completed. Nebraska replied that my file is in a secure area and why it is there or how long it will be there is anybody's guess. Exactly the same words above.

And reply for my multiple SRs with NSC also says that my petition is under additional review.

I believe what they say to Senator and that my case is delayed not for the dreaded Name check but within Nebraska.

In this circumstance do I need to make FBI and its director a party to my Civil Action?
 
June1506 said:
Hi AGC4ME,

Congressional Nebraska's reply to Senator which the Senator forwarded to me says my FBI Namecheck is completed and background check is completed. Nebraska replied that my file is in a secure area and why it is there or how long it will be there is anybody's guess. Exactly the same words above.

And reply for my multiple SRs with NSC also says that my petition is under additional review.

I believe what they say to Senator and that my case is delayed not for the dreaded Name check but within Nebraska.

In this circumstance do I need to make FBI and its director a party to my Civil Action?
Click to expand...

You can take an infopass to make sure your nc is cleared. if it is indeed clear then no need to include FBI as a party to your suit.
 
Ecf

lazycis said:
Congrats! Your preparation paid off. Finally you'll be able to sleep well. I have to note that you have tons of patience. Those papers are probably related to ECF (electronic court filing). Keep in mind that you do not have to use ECF in your district. Please update us on your progress.
Click to expand...

you are one step ahead of me and correct, as usual, those documents I received were instructions for ECF. Now, I'm confused about how I can avoid electronic filing, since the doc states:
" the case has been designated for this court's ECF...Each attorney representing a party must
a) Register to become efiler..
b) email the complaint
c) access dockets on Pacer.."

I also have to make copies of this handout and send it out together with case copies.
Should I just ignore this handout ? or still send the copies to defendants ? The clerk was not very talkative.. Maybe I should call in tomorrow and ask someone in the clerk's office..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lotechguy said:
Good luck lenaf. You did the right thing. Now just mail the summons by certified mail/return recipt and file the proof of service with the court when you receive the Green cards back or when USPS website confirms delivery.
Click to expand...

thank you, we all need some luck :)
I'm going to do it tomorrow. One copy still needs to be sent to US attorney of my district, correct ?
I'm wondering if the clerk has sent it out already by email.
 
lenaf said:
thank you, we all need some luck :)
I'm going to do it tomorrow. One copy still needs to be sent to US attorney of my district, correct ?
I'm wondering if the clerk has sent it out already by email.
Click to expand...

yes. In my case I had total of 5 defendants. So I had to make 10 copies, two each for each defendant plus 2 for AUSA, total 12. ie 6 pairs and get them all stamped by court clerk. From each pair I sent one copy to defendent (including AUSA) and filed the other, duly filled + Green recipt card attached, as proof of service with the court, so filed 6 summons duly filled + Green receipt cards attached as proof of service. After 2 weeks, call AUSA office an dfind out AUSA assigned to your case and talk to him/her.
 
lenaf said:
you are one step ahead of me and correct, as usual, those documents I received were instructions for ECF. Now, I'm confused about how I can avoid electronic filing, since the doc states:
" the case has been designated for this court's ECF...Each attorney representing a party must
a) Register to become efiler..
b) email the complaint
c) access dockets on Pacer.."

I also have to make copies of this handout and send it out together with case copies.
Should I just ignore this handout ? or still send the copies to defendants ? The clerk was not very talkative.. Maybe I should call in tomorrow and ask someone in the clerk's office..
Click to expand...

Lena,
Just ignore it. Did you read general order no. 45 on your court website?
https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/docs/go45.htm

They shall not require Pro Se to participate in ECF according to that order (section III). We've been thru that before with another member. Unless you really want to use ECF... You can call the clerk to confirm.
 
lazycis said:
Lena,
Just ignore it. Did you read general order no. 45 on your court website?
https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/docs/go45.htm

They shall not require Pro Se to participate in ECF according to that order (section III). We've been thru that before with another member. Unless you really want to use ECF... You can call the clerk to confirm.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link, just read it. I also called the clerk, who confirmed that I don't have to use ECF, but I still have to send the copy of handout to all defendants.

I was trying to find my case in Pacer, but it's not there yet, I guess they'll post it after everyone is served.
 
This is a fascinating thread, and I used all the info here to file 1447b Pro-Se
in SF in July of 2007, one year after my interview.

As expected, 2 weeks after the lawsuit USCIS fingerprinted me
again and send a request for updated information since the interview.
2 more weeks passed, and AUSA called me to tell me that my namecheck
has cleared and asked me to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit.

Now this is when it gets interesting. I dismissed the lawsuit,
and 3 weeks later contacted AUSA again. She said, let me check with
USCIS. One more week passed, and I reminded her again.
She replied saying that she is sorry, but USCIS provided her with
wrong information, and that my background check has not cleared.

Wow, thanks USCIS and AUSA!

Does anyone know what are my options at this point?
I suppose I can reopen the case, or file a new one with additional
evidence (emails from AUSA). I guess I could complain to CIS
Ombudsman, and AUSA bosses, which is probably a waste of time.

If anyone has any ideas please post.
 
Dilemma over filing WoM

I was planning on filing WoM this October until I recieved 2. Fingerprinting notice. I got the notice 2 days ago and yesterday they took my fingerprinting. (since I will be out of country on appointment date I went in there early. )

Now I got this dilemma. Should I wait? or Should I go ahead and file WoM thru my lawyer next month?

What would you all recommend?
Any post or Private messages greatly appreciated.
 
thanksuscis said:
This is a fascinating thread, and I used all the info here to file 1447b Pro-Se
in SF in July of 2007, one year after my interview.

As expected, 2 weeks after the lawsuit USCIS fingerprinted me
again and send a request for updated information since the interview.
2 more weeks passed, and AUSA called me to tell me that my namecheck
has cleared and asked me to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit.

Now this is when it gets interesting. I dismissed the lawsuit,
and 3 weeks later contacted AUSA again. She said, let me check with
USCIS. One more week passed, and I reminded her again.
She replied saying that she is sorry, but USCIS provided her with
wrong information, and that my background check has not cleared.

Wow, thanks USCIS and AUSA!

Does anyone know what are my options at this point?
I suppose I can reopen the case, or file a new one with additional
evidence (emails from AUSA). I guess I could complain to CIS
Ombudsman, and AUSA bosses, which is probably a waste of time.

If anyone has any ideas please post.
Click to expand...

Was your case dismissed with prejudice or without prejudice ? Was it dismissed according to FRCP 41(a)(1). Best bet would be to reopen the case. File a motion to reopen. How many days have elapsed since the case was dismissed ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top