Search results

Thank happyball and others for the advice regarding case dismissal. The reason I agreed to sign the dismissal form is that I got approval emails from USCIS. Also, the AUSA sent me the copy of my original I485 application form with "approved" stamp on it. Yes, for Central District Court of...

jzdc, Don't be upset. I didn't see the AUSA provided concrete reasons to deny your allegations. Could you post the paragraphs of your complaints that were cited by the AUSA, so that we can help you to make analysis.

Dismissal form AUSA sent me a pre-typed dismissal form. It is for Central District of California, form code CV-9. Its subject is "Notice of Dismissal Pursuant Rule 41(a) or (c) F.R.Civ.P." In the section of "Please take Notice", "This action is dismissed by the Plaintiff(s) in its...

Thanks paz1960. Yes, I do need a sample of motion to dismiss the case. The AUSA said he would send me some form with this regard, but I don't think it will include a wording sample.

Another victory I received several emails from USCIS saying my I485 and my spouse’s I485 have been approved, and new cards have been ordered. An AUSA just left a message to my cell phone. He confirmed the approval and requested me to file a motion to dismiss the case. Can you believe it? I...

Each court has local rules I think each district court has different local rules. The court I filed my WOM is Central California District Court at Downtown LA. I first submitted summons with one summon per defendant, but the clerk said all defendants' name should be put onto single Summon...

download Pro Se package from the web site Oceanid99, Why not just download it from the court website? Those forms are inputable PDF files, to which you can fill out directly on the computer. California Central District court's site has these forms, not sure if other courts' website have...

filed I485 WOM today I did it at California Central District at Downtown LA. Everything was smooth. The clerk was very nice. One clarification, all defendants should be put onto a single summon form (at least required at this court). The clerk returned 2 copies to me with case number...

ID: PD: ND: LUD xxx888~~~ 11/13/2001~~~12/01/2004~~~8/15, 8/16 potter~~~ 11/10/1002~~~12/05/2003~~~8/15, 8/16

Please don't put spam here Jonese, Do you think it is appropriate to post so many times of the same article here? You are contaminating this forum. You will get nothing by doing so, even sympathy from the viewers. BTW, I heard Mr. Zhang's talk on radio before. I was pissed...

yes, April 2001 was a hill becuase of 245I cases. Let's hope some faster movement on Eb3 in following months.

GCIsTortoise, I guess you are damn right. I bet USCIS wouldn't dare to release the figure of revenue generated from those renewals. It is totally a lie that USCIS got cases backlog because of insufficient fund for hiring more people.

What is the next step? After getting enough people into this case, what is the next step? Is there any place we can register out personal information, so that it can be listed in the lawsuit. Should we donate some money to hire a lawyer to do the paperwork? Folks, we should work...

Count me in

Agree. My case has been pending for name check since Dec. 2003. And a recent inquiry still gave me this answer. The logic that FBI put on lastname and firstname for name check doesn't make sense on Chinese cases. There are hundreds of millions of Chinese people share the same last name...

mamamiax, all EB3 are doomed. The impact of 245I cases is much worse than I thought.

what a disappointment for EB3!

I remember a memo from USCIS last year clarified that AC21 does apply to self-employment as long as you still work in a similar field of your original job.

Good point! They can fool us, but have to tell the truth to the senate. I'll bet USCIS has issued very limited number of GC visas of EB3 category for this fiscal year so far.

EB3 filers really need some blessing It is strange DOL didn't mention anything about 245I cases. The only reason that EB3 cut-off date stayed unchanged since last month is that many 245I cases became current. However, from the silence of DOL on this issue, I can tell this is not true. They...