you WILL NOT be charged for filing document(since that's via your ECF account) but you WILL still be charged for viewing documents on your PACER account.
Anyone with a lawsuit against USCIS or thinking about a lawsuit (Merged)
- Thread starter Publicus
- Start date
you WILL NOT be charged for filing document(since that's via your ECF account) but you WILL still be charged for viewing documents on your PACER account.
It doesn't matter how you file the case. efiling should be optional for Pro Se filers. At least that's the case in my district(N.D. CAL).
Last edited by a moderator:
about the visa bulletin in July 2007
I got the cross-MSJ from the AUSA today. In its exhibits (Declaration ofr F. Gerard Heinauer), it says "there was a visa number available for aliens with her priority date in only 5 of those 34 months." I asserted in my MSJ that my priorty date has been current for 6 months and I think the main argument is on July 2007.
On June 12, 2007, the State department issued Visa Bulletin No 107, indicating that visa numbers are available in all categories to applicants during July. However, on July 2, 2007, the State department issued an "Update on July Visa Availability", indicating that all employment based visa numbers in all categories have been exhausted.
I think the DOS issued something later to rescind "July 2nd Update", but I cannot find that document. Could anyone help on that? THen I could argue that the defendants provide false information to the court under penalty of perjury.
I just found the file myself. So never mind. I also found that they were right about the 5-month thing and I made an honest mistake on that.
I got the cross-MSJ from the AUSA today. In its exhibits (Declaration ofr F. Gerard Heinauer), it says "there was a visa number available for aliens with her priority date in only 5 of those 34 months." I asserted in my MSJ that my priorty date has been current for 6 months and I think the main argument is on July 2007.
On June 12, 2007, the State department issued Visa Bulletin No 107, indicating that visa numbers are available in all categories to applicants during July. However, on July 2, 2007, the State department issued an "Update on July Visa Availability", indicating that all employment based visa numbers in all categories have been exhausted.
I think the DOS issued something later to rescind "July 2nd Update", but I cannot find that document. Could anyone help on that? THen I could argue that the defendants provide false information to the court under penalty of perjury.
I just found the file myself. So never mind. I also found that they were right about the 5-month thing and I made an honest mistake on that.
Last edited by a moderator:
The cross MSJ and statement of facts
Hey, lazy and others,
Attached are the cross MSJ and statement of facts filed by AUSA on Thursday. They also have this 37 pages of exhibits attached to the MSJ. I think the AUSA and I are trying to "paper each other to death" at this point.
I told AUSA that I want some kind of assurance that they will adjudicate my case before August 10th. But she said they cannot promise anything. So I may file an application for TRO on August 1st or 4th. At the same time, I will submit some info about my new employer and job duties to the USCIS through my immigration attorney, which is proof that I am still in the same research area. It seems that I still have a lot of work to do, such as find out how to file an emergency motion etc. But at least I feel I am so close to getting out of this "green card prision".
Any advice and comments on the attached files are welcome!
Hey, lazy and others,
Attached are the cross MSJ and statement of facts filed by AUSA on Thursday. They also have this 37 pages of exhibits attached to the MSJ. I think the AUSA and I are trying to "paper each other to death" at this point.
I told AUSA that I want some kind of assurance that they will adjudicate my case before August 10th. But she said they cannot promise anything. So I may file an application for TRO on August 1st or 4th. At the same time, I will submit some info about my new employer and job duties to the USCIS through my immigration attorney, which is proof that I am still in the same research area. It seems that I still have a lot of work to do, such as find out how to file an emergency motion etc. But at least I feel I am so close to getting out of this "green card prision".
Any advice and comments on the attached files are welcome!
some more questions
Hey, lazy and others,
I am working on a draft of TRO and don't understand one sentence after I read it so many times and it is underlined. I took it from wom-ri's TRO. Could anyone explain it more clearly to me if you know what it means? As I remember, the judge told me that " there will be no trail for my case". So what it means by " the trial of the action on the merits"? Thanks
Alternatively, since time is of the essence, and the Court may, before or after the commencement of the hearing of an application for a preliminary injunction, order the trial of the action on the merits to be advanced and consolidated with the hearing of the application.Plaintiff would request that this matter be expedited in order to protect Plaintiff’s interest.
Hey, lazy and others,
I am working on a draft of TRO and don't understand one sentence after I read it so many times and it is underlined. I took it from wom-ri's TRO. Could anyone explain it more clearly to me if you know what it means? As I remember, the judge told me that " there will be no trail for my case". So what it means by " the trial of the action on the merits"? Thanks
Alternatively, since time is of the essence, and the Court may, before or after the commencement of the hearing of an application for a preliminary injunction, order the trial of the action on the merits to be advanced and consolidated with the hearing of the application.Plaintiff would request that this matter be expedited in order to protect Plaintiff’s interest.
Lazycis and Others,
In my 1447(b), I mentioned the cases in which court grant Oath to Plaintiff rather than remanding the case back to USCIS like:
Lifshaz v. Gonzales, No. 06-1470, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28946 (W.D. Wash. 2007), Astafieva v. Gonzales, No, 06-04820, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28993 (D. Cal. 2007); Shalan v. Chertoff, No. 05-10980, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 253 (D. Mass. 2006).
Could you please provide me 3-4 more cases in the same context especially in Oklahoma state (if possible). Thanks so much!
OK-Boy
In my 1447(b), I mentioned the cases in which court grant Oath to Plaintiff rather than remanding the case back to USCIS like:
Lifshaz v. Gonzales, No. 06-1470, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28946 (W.D. Wash. 2007), Astafieva v. Gonzales, No, 06-04820, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28993 (D. Cal. 2007); Shalan v. Chertoff, No. 05-10980, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 253 (D. Mass. 2006).
Could you please provide me 3-4 more cases in the same context especially in Oklahoma state (if possible). Thanks so much!
OK-Boy
1st circuit WOMs for AOS
Hi everyone,
Does anyone know what are all Favorable/unfavorable AOS WOMs esp. in MA or in 1st circuit (MA,ME,RI,NH and Puerto Rico) in general:
I know following, are there more? Please share your finds. Looks like in MA, there aren't many cases where Court rules in favor of AOS plaintiffs.
Favorable:
Hi everyone,
Does anyone know what are all Favorable/unfavorable AOS WOMs esp. in MA or in 1st circuit (MA,ME,RI,NH and Puerto Rico) in general:
I know following, are there more? Please share your finds. Looks like in MA, there aren't many cases where Court rules in favor of AOS plaintiffs.
Favorable:
- Tang v. Chertoff, 493 F. Supp. 2d 148 (D. Mass. 2007) [delay of four years unreasonable]
- Zhou v. FBI Director , No. 07-cv-238-PB, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46186 (D. NH June 12, 2008) [delay of approx. three years unreasonable]
- Vorontsova v. Chertoff, No. 07-10426-RGS, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81522 (D. Mass. Nov. 2, 2007) [delay of 20 months reasonable, under appeal in Court of Appeals, 1st circuit]
- Touarsi v. Mueller, 538 F. Supp. 2d 447 (D. Mass. 2008) [Court lacks jurisdiction]
I got the cross-MSJ from the AUSA today. In its exhibits (Declaration ofr F. Gerard Heinauer), it says "there was a visa number available for aliens with her priority date in only 5 of those 34 months." I asserted in my MSJ that my priorty date has been current for 6 months and I think the main argument is on July 2007.
On June 12, 2007, the State department issued Visa Bulletin No 107, indicating that visa numbers are available in all categories to applicants during July. However, on July 2, 2007, the State department issued an "Update on July Visa Availability", indicating that all employment based visa numbers in all categories have been exhausted.
I think the DOS issued something later to rescind "July 2nd Update", but I cannot find that document. Could anyone help on that? THen I could argue that the defendants provide false information to the court under penalty of perjury.
I just found the file myself. So never mind. I also found that they were right about the 5-month thing and I made an honest mistake on that.
2008 Ombudsman report has references to all relevant docs regarding July 2007 epic.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2008.pdf
Also, DHS reports that about 7,000 recaptured numbers were used in FY2007 so we were right, after all, that there were AC21 numbers left.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/LPR_FR_2007.pdf
Hey, lazy and others,
I am working on a draft of TRO and don't understand one sentence after I read it so many times and it is underlined. I took it from wom-ri's TRO. Could anyone explain it more clearly to me if you know what it means? As I remember, the judge told me that " there will be no trail for my case". So what it means by " the trial of the action on the merits"? Thanks
Alternatively, since time is of the essence, and the Court may, before or after the commencement of the hearing of an application for a preliminary injunction, order the trial of the action on the merits to be advanced and consolidated with the hearing of the application.Plaintiff would request that this matter be expedited in order to protect Plaintiff’s interest.
We need to ask wom_ri to interpret this
In your TRO, I would ask court to issue TRO to reserve visa numbers for Plaintiffs and to consider Plaintiffs' MSJ expeditiously. I would file TRO ASAP using August 08 VB and wom_ri TRO.
I am trying to understand these instructions from the FBI name check wikibook:
# 12. Use the USPS online tracking record to file Proof of Serving with the court, and send a copy to the US Attorney’s office. If you have a CM/ECF account, the notification to the AUSA is automatic by email, you do not need to send him/her anything.
# 13. From here, every time you file something with the court, send a copy to your local US attorney and file a Certificate of service with the court.
My return of service (one for each defendant) is filled out and I have attached a copy of the USPS certified mail receipt.
Do I need to file a copy of these forms with the Clerk and the AUSA (I do not have an ECF account)?
Who gets the Certificate of Service? The Clerk and the AUSA?
Hey, lazy,
Yes, I asked him and he said it sounds cool to put "trial" in there and the wording doesn't matter. I think he is right, probably.
I will file application for TRO on July 24th because I have a status hearing on that day and I need to be at downtown anyways. And I will ask the court to schedule a hearing about TRO before or on August 6 (excluding July 31-Aug 1). I have some important job duty on those two days and don't want to lose my job before I get GC. I think that would make it like a semi-emergency motion. I called the clerk's office and try to find out if I should file it with the clerk's office or judge's chamber and didn't get much useful info. I will call tomorrow and to see if i can talk with a knowlegable clerk or not. Thanks for all the useful info, lazycis!
Yes, I asked him and he said it sounds cool to put "trial" in there and the wording doesn't matter. I think he is right, probably.
I will file application for TRO on July 24th because I have a status hearing on that day and I need to be at downtown anyways. And I will ask the court to schedule a hearing about TRO before or on August 6 (excluding July 31-Aug 1). I have some important job duty on those two days and don't want to lose my job before I get GC. I think that would make it like a semi-emergency motion. I called the clerk's office and try to find out if I should file it with the clerk's office or judge's chamber and didn't get much useful info. I will call tomorrow and to see if i can talk with a knowlegable clerk or not. Thanks for all the useful info, lazycis!
We need to ask wom_ri to interpret this
In your TRO, I would ask court to issue TRO to reserve visa numbers for Plaintiffs and to consider Plaintiffs' MSJ expeditiously. I would file TRO ASAP using August 08 VB and wom_ri TRO.
1447(b) Background Preparation
Lazycis and Others,
N-400 WOM (requires to show exhaustion of remedies) while N-400 1447(b) (doesn’t require to show exhaustion of remedies). I was wondering to know do I need to show of much effort/activity (proof of correspondence with USCIS & congressional members, info pass, 1-800 status inquiry, etc) during the 120 days (the duration between the initial examination and no decision within 4 months) ot it really doesn’t matter. I personally do believe that I don’t need to show of any such effort for 1447(b) in order to get more the court's sympathy to my case. Please advice…
OK-Boy
Lazycis and Others,
N-400 WOM (requires to show exhaustion of remedies) while N-400 1447(b) (doesn’t require to show exhaustion of remedies). I was wondering to know do I need to show of much effort/activity (proof of correspondence with USCIS & congressional members, info pass, 1-800 status inquiry, etc) during the 120 days (the duration between the initial examination and no decision within 4 months) ot it really doesn’t matter. I personally do believe that I don’t need to show of any such effort for 1447(b) in order to get more the court's sympathy to my case. Please advice…
OK-Boy
I'm under the impression that the certificate of service or Proof of Service should be filed with the court. The wiki page will have to be corrected if this is generally true.
Again it's the court that should receive the Certificate of Service.
From Northern District of California Pro Guide:
"The purpose of the certificate of service is to allow the court to determine whether service of the documents was actually accomplished in accordance with the requirements of the law."
I think you do need to send a copy of everything you filed with the court to AUSA, which includes Certificate of Service.
Certificate of service - yes, but proof of service of summons and complaint - no. It does not hurt to serve anything you file with the court to AUSA though.
You are right that 1447b does not require you to show your efforts to resolve the issue. But I would include everything, it will make your argument against remand to USCIS stronger.
Does anyone have any experience dealing with WOM complaints (on AOS, not citizenship) in the Eastern District of Virginia? Our case was transferred to EDVA and I was wondering what the feeling is about the record of this court in handling WOM lawsuits. Appreciate any insights.
Presiding Judge is the one who handles your case. Referring judge is the judge who was initially assigned to the case but then forwarded the case to the presiding judge.