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

Ralphy, I have a different AUSA

Ralphy said:
Balto,

Who is your USDA?

Also, it seems to be a signature of the INS' Baltimore DO of scheduling the oath and not letting the applicant to know about that. Based on your story, I am starting to suspect that my USDA knew about my "missed" oath on 6/23, but failed to let me know. Then she must be a very good actress.
Click to expand...
If I remembered correctly, your AUSA is Kristine something, I did not have her. I was not really happy about the way my AUSA handled my case, to say the least, but at least she called me back after I called her and she did e-mail the N-445 to me after all. I was not particularly happy b/c she had my approval on 6/29/06, 2 days after I called her, and on 7/7/06 I sent her a FAX asking about my case, and she did not get back to me until 7/11 after I called her again on 7/10. I was thinking calling her on 7/17, the day before the answer is due but decided to do so one week earlier. Had I not done that, I would "miss" the oath just like you! Well, I guess the moral of the story is, you have to bug these people constantly, or something bad will happen. Sad, but true :(

Balto
 
Does anybody here have any experience with WOM in Boston? I filed my WOM case on June 5, 2006, 60 days period ends on September 3, 2006.

________
I-485 RD April 2003
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Item for discussion

Following is taken from www.visalaw.com July 2006
Looks like USCIS tries to cut the oxygen.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
USCIS Issues Memorandum Concerning FBI Name Check Delays in Relation to Naturalization Applications

USCIS has issued a memorandum concerning FBI Name Check delays in relation to naturalization applications. In addition to requesting fingerprint checks, USCIS routinely submits an applicant’s information to the FBI for an additional background check known as the name check. The overwhelming majority of these name checks are completed within a few weeks of the request and virtually all of the name checks are completed within six months. However, in some instances the name check can take upwards of several years to resolve. The delay in this underlying process results in a delay to the naturalization application, as the application cannot be adjudicated until all background checks have been completed.



When a naturalization application takes longer than 120 days to adjudicate from the date of the naturalization examination, an applicant is permitted to bring a lawsuit in federal court and a judge can determine the outcome of the application (INA Section 336(b)). Applicants have recently been filing claims under this section of law where they have completed their naturalization interview, more than 120 days have passed since the interview, and where the application is still pending due to a delay with the FBI name check.



The USCIS memo points out that courts have not been approving naturalization applications where all background checks have not been resolved and have only occasionally given the FBI and USCIS deadlines where the delay has been upwards of four years. To prevent further filings under this section, USCIS will now refrain from scheduling naturalization interviews until all background checks, including the FBI name check, are completed. As for 336(b) actions that will be filed or are already pending, USCIS states that it will vigorously defend their position and will remain confident that the courts will not approve applications that have not completed the necessary security checks.



The memorandum notes that this will not eliminate mandamus actions on FBI name check delays, but will act to limit 336(b) filings.
 
Nadler Attempts to Reduce Backlog of Security Checks for Immigrants

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The House of Representatives last night failed to pass an amendment offered by Congressman Jerrold Nadler to reduce the backlog of security checks for immigrants seeking legal status. The amendment, offered to the Science, State, Justice & Commerce Appropriations Act, would have provided $40 million for the FBI’s National Name Check Program (NNCP), which conducts security background checks on names it receives from multiple federal agencies.


“We ought to process these checks efficiently; the enormous backlog of background check requests does an injustice to immigrants—and poses a national security threat at the same time,” Congressman Nadler said. “Law-abiding immigrants should not have to wait years for their approval, and neither should would-be terrorists be allowed years of sanctuary in our country.”


Since the attacks of September 11th, the program has accumulated a significant backlog. In fiscal year 2006 alone, the National Name Check Program received 3,346,435 requests for background checks.


United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) is the largest source of NNCP requests because of the number of immigrants applying for asylum, legal permanent residency, and citizenship. The backlog has resulted in a major delay in the processing of immigration applications.


The Nadler amendment would have helped the FBI eliminate the backlog and process new requests more quickly. To offset this increase, $40 million would have been cut from the Department of Justice Legal Activities, Salaries and Expenses account. The amendment failed on a vote of 176-243.
Reply With Quote
 
Congratulations!

Congrats! Buggin! You've walked a long way and the victory is well deserved!

buggin said:
Hi all,

Congratulations to those who got their approvals or are very close to it! And wish lots of good luck and persistance to those who are still fighting for theirs.

Yesterday, 7/11, I received a copy of the court order to dismiss my case without prejudice as stipulated by both parties signed by the judge.

So, my case is officially dismissed, closed, finished.... :D
Click to expand...
 
ernorman said:
Nadler Attempts to Reduce Backlog of Security Checks for Immigrants

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The House of Representatives last night failed to pass an amendment offered by Congressman Jerrold Nadler to reduce the backlog of security checks for immigrants seeking legal status. The amendment, offered to the Science, State, Justice & Commerce Appropriations Act, would have provided $40 million for the FBI’s National Name Check Program (NNCP), which conducts security background checks on names it receives from multiple federal agencies.


“We ought to process these checks efficiently; the enormous backlog of background check requests does an injustice to immigrants—and poses a national security threat at the same time,” Congressman Nadler said. “Law-abiding immigrants should not have to wait years for their approval, and neither should would-be terrorists be allowed years of sanctuary in our country.”


Since the attacks of September 11th, the program has accumulated a significant backlog. In fiscal year 2006 alone, the National Name Check Program received 3,346,435 requests for background checks.


United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) is the largest source of NNCP requests because of the number of immigrants applying for asylum, legal permanent residency, and citizenship. The backlog has resulted in a major delay in the processing of immigration applications.


The Nadler amendment would have helped the FBI eliminate the backlog and process new requests more quickly. To offset this increase, $40 million would have been cut from the Department of Justice Legal Activities, Salaries and Expenses account. The amendment failed on a vote of 176-243.
Reply With Quote
Click to expand...

Ernorman,

Thanks for the post, do you know when this effort was made, and what the website reference to this post is.

Actually this is highlighting the importance of the letters we sent to the congressmen, senates, president...and so on.

So I urge everybody to continue send letters to these people to make them aware of our problem with the name check process.

As more we complains, the issue will be highlighted for the officials, and we may get them to issue a decision which will help us and other name check victims.

Regards,

Moody
 
I received this from my friend today. I don't know where he gets it. But even if this bill passed today in House. Senate has to pass a similar bill and the two chambers reconcile. President has to sign into law. And even after that, wait FBI hire more "analyst" and do their job. After it is all done, I will probably have grandsons....
 
2nd interview

A little update. Yesterday I got my fingerprints done. Today I got a call from the AUSA saying that my fingerprint checks passed.
He asked for a 45 days extension and told me that INS had scheduled a 2nd interview sometime in august.

Why the frick do they wanna interview me a second time? I got a feeling they want to deny my S.., and on top of that to know that they could of my done my fingerprints in 1 day rather than have me waiting 2 years..

Has anybody here done a 2nd interview?

PS: on my 1st interview they told me everything was fine except the background check was pending
 
ernorman said:
I received this from my friend today. I don't know where he gets it. But even if this bill passed today in House. Senate has to pass a similar bill and the two chambers reconcile. President has to sign into law. And even after that, wait FBI hire more "analyst" and do their job. After it is all done, I will probably have grandsons....
Click to expand...


This is sooo creative! Instead of fixing Name Check bottle neck they're working hard on avoiding lawsuits.

See attachment that I found in internet.
 
Reading that Memorandum one must wonder whether it is worthwhile to file a Petition for Hearing on a Naturalization Application after the 120-day period runs out...

It sounds like USCIS has reached some sort of "agreement" with U.S. District Courts to remand cases back to USCIS, in many cases without a specific deadline to adjudicate naturalization applications. If that is how things are going on, I guess we are really powerless to do anything about our situation.

When I spoke with an Information Agent at the Miami Naturalization Office last June 30, she was unable to tell me when USCIS had submitted the Name Check request to the FBI, therefore I have no idea how long the Name Check has been pending. If 99 % of all background checks are completed within 6 months, mine should have been completed already...

Should we file Writ of Mandamus against the FBI? USCIS is basically blaming the FBI for the delay because according to them "cases are not ripe for adjudication" until all background checks are completed...

I'm very frustrated, upset, confused...




z350 said:
This is sooo creative! Instead of fixing Name Check bottle neck they're working hard on avoiding lawsuits.

See attachment that I found in internet.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
we are in the same boat. I guess it should be fine. I will go ahead file a WOM since the purpose of filing is just to ask them to process my case including asking FBI to clear my name check. In terms of informing USCIS about job change, I have not done that. My lawyer said that I did not have to. I once asked an immigration offcier and he told me I should. Anyway, I will wait for REF from USCIS. The WOM is largely dealing with pending FBI name check.
 
thanks

Thanks.

bobbyren said:
Frankxie,

Emilio T. Gonzalez (not Emiliot) is the director of USCIS, not DHS. I am not sure why you use Jonathan Scharfen, acting Deputy Director as a defendant, but I used Emilio T. Gonzalez. So I used:

(1) Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland SecurityOffice of the General Counsel
US Department of Homeland Security
20 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Suite 4025
Washington, DC 20529

(2) Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of USCIS
Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
20 Massachusetts Ave, NW, Suite 4025
Washington, DC 20529


The addresses for the other three are right. But I think you don't want to have Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General as your defendant, although you need to serve him after you get summons.

Good luck
bobbyren
Click to expand...
 
Name Checks Requests

Does anyone here know, how to find out that when USCIS requested name checks to FBI and if FBI responded back on a name check request or not...

I think there is some one in FBI you write for such detail... I know for sure that it is different from FOIPA request...

Does any one know how to find out if a name check was requested to FBI and if there was a response back from FBI to USCIS???
 
Einmalig:

I understand your frustradation. I am on the same boat. I think USCIS are tring to scare people off so that no one is going to fine 1447(b) lawsuit again. In fact, I don't think they have any chance to win the lawsuit unless the applicant has some background issue, because lengthy background check is not good for national security. Otherwise, why do you think they will cancel interview to avoid the lawsuit? Look at the the bright side, you can sue them at the end of this month. And I have to wait until almost the end of August. You will find out soon.

good luck,

jack

Einmalig said:
Reading that Memorandum one must wonder whether it is worthwhile to file a Petition for Hearing on a Naturalization Application after the 120-day period runs out...

It sounds like USCIS has reached some sort of "agreement" with U.S. District Courts to remand cases back to USCIS, in many cases without a specific deadline to adjudicate naturalization applications. If that is how things are going on, I guess we are really powerless to do anything about our situation.

When I spoke with an Information Agent at the Miami Naturalization Office last June 30, she was unable to tell me when USCIS had submitted the Name Check request to the FBI, therefore I have no idea how long the Name Check has been pending. If 99 % of all background checks are completed within 6 months, mine should have been completed already...

Should we file Writ of Mandamus against the FBI? USCIS is basically blaming the FBI for the delay because according to them "cases are not ripe for adjudication" until all background checks are completed...

I'm very frustraded, upset, confused...
Click to expand...
 
Haddy said:
Does anyone here know, how to find out that when USCIS requested name checks to FBI and if FBI responded back on a name check request or not...

I think there is some one in FBI you write for such detail... I know for sure that it is different from FOIPA request...

Does any one know how to find out if a name check was requested to FBI and if there was a response back from FBI to USCIS???
Click to expand...

Hello,

When I went to my first infopass, I asked the office and he told me they sent it in July 05, same week I apply for my citizenship. When I spoke to the U.S attorney he mentions that to me that the USICS have sent my name check in July 05.

I hope this is help
 
Bashar82 had 2nd interview, search his post in April or May.

gzmbk1 said:
A little update. Yesterday I got my fingerprints done. Today I got a call from the AUSA saying that my fingerprint checks passed.
He asked for a 45 days extension and told me that INS had scheduled a 2nd interview sometime in august.

Why the frick do they wanna interview me a second time? I got a feeling they want to deny my S.., and on top of that to know that they could of my done my fingerprints in 1 day rather than have me waiting 2 years..

Has anybody here done a 2nd interview?

PS: on my 1st interview they told me everything was fine except the background check was pending
Click to expand...
 
Hi everyone,
I have an update. Today the Assistant of US Attorney called me. She asked me to "remand the case back to USCIS for 45 days". She didnt tell me that USCIS is ready to grand my application only that USCIS will adjudicate my application within 45 days and let me know about the result. She was nice and friendly but didnt give me any guarantee regarding my case. I ask her about 30 days not 45. She will call me tommorow and let me know if it is O.K. with the INS.
Now I am thinking, what is better for me: ask her for dissmisal of the case or go forward with the "remand motion"??? I dont want to give the INS a chance to screw me up. :confused:
Guys, please give me your ideas what should I do? HELP!!!
 
FrankXie

FrankXie,

Yes, we are in the same boat. I consulted two lawyers. One replied that sometime lawsuit can harm the case (I don't really think she knows). The other one doesn't reply. Are you going to file a WOM without filing AC-21? Do you have any information on similar cases to ours? My wife will start reading the materials tomorrow and hopefully get things going soon. Please keep in touch.

My case detail

EB2: PD 11/2001
485 RD: 7/2004

Hope
 
Filed 1447(b)

I did filled 1447(b) on July 11th, US district attorney and Washington DistricUSCIS director did get my certified mail but FBI, DHS, DOJ have not recieved my cerfied mail yet.

I will update my progress if any, here is my timeline for info purpose.

N400 filed: 08/16/04
FP: 02/16/05
Interview: 08/10/05 (Name check Pending)

Name Check initited by USCIS: 09/03/04 (according to senater).


Lets see what will be the outcome of this lawsuit.


Thanks All
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top