Here is a little bit more about G325A information:
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cis-sop-aos/7-3-3.html
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cis-sop-aos/7-3-3.html
Amir/Houston said:Hello everybody,
I don't know if you guys remember or not, I filled mine (1447) on 3/02/06 and I just received the answer via e-mail from US attorny. I think they denied because of lack of jurisdiction. I don't know what is the next step that I should take. I appreciate any advise.
Thanks
Defendants, through the United States Attorney, Answer Plaintiff’s Petition for Hearing on Naturalization Application, addressing the consecutively numbered paragraphs seriatim:
INTRODUCTION
Paragraph 1 describes the nature of the action, to which no answer is required.
PARTIES
First numbered Paragraph 2 is admitted in part and denied in part. Defendants admit that Plaintiff ******, is a lawful permanent resident. Defendants are without sufficient knowledge to admit or deny Plaintiff Rahighi’s current address. Defendants admit that Plaintiff *** was interviewed concerning his Form N-400 naturalization application on July 11, 2005, and that no decision has been made on the application since that date.
#2. Second Paragraph 2 describes Defendant Alberto Gonzales to which no answer is required.
Paragraph 3 describes Defendant Michael Chertoff to which no answer is required.
Paragraph 4 describes Defendant Emilio Gonzalez to which no answer is required.
There is no Paragraph 5.
Paragraph 6 describes Defendant Sharon Hudson to which no answer is required.
Paragraph 7 describes Defendant Robert Mueller to which no answer is required.
JURISDICTION
Subject to Defendants’ First Affirmative Defense, jurisdiction over the subject matter of this suit is admitted.
TRUNKATED
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
One or more of the allegations in the Petition fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
kenny485 said:OCT2005, this is for you.
All is correct except Emilio T. Gonzalez.
It should be:
Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director, USCIS
425 I Street NW,
Washington, DC 20536
needsolution said:I have talked to an immigration attorney who used to be a US Attorney. She told me that this is pretty much the standard defense that US Attorney gives. They are taught to raise jurisdiction issues regardless of their arguments being valid or not. So when you are reading US Attorney's response, do not think of what they are saying is correct or not. They are taught to dispute everything, just as jurisdiction even if they are wrong and even if they know they are wrong.
Really, US Attorney's defense is basically just a sales presentation given by the US Attorney trying to convince the judge to either dismiss the case or rule in their favor, that is all.
Just like you are presenting your presentation to the judge to rule in your favor.
Emily,breezyemily said:Oct2005 and Kenny485,
I thought for employee of DHS, one should file with office of the General Consel. Here are the addresses I used:
Alberto Gonzales
Attorney General
U. S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Michael Chertoff
Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
Office of the General Counsel
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528
Emilio Gonzalez
Director, USCIS
Office of the General Counsel
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528
Robert S. Mueller
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20535-0001
Emily
breezyemily said:Oct2005 and Kenny485,
I thought for employee of DHS, one should file with office of the General Consel. Here are the addresses I used:
Alberto Gonzales
Attorney General
U. S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Michael Chertoff
Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
Office of the General Counsel
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528
Emilio Gonzalez
Director, USCIS
Office of the General Counsel
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528
Robert S. Mueller
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20535-0001
Emily
Suzy977 said:I don't want to gamble with your money, $350 plus other expenses, but I believe USCIS either is not going to respond to you, or you'll get a generic answer saying that your Name Check is pending...
It's only your call to wait or to file the lawsuit, like I've said, in my opinion their answer, if any, won't help you at all...but I don't want you to make a decision based on what I think...
The Name Check is done by NNCP an FBI branch.
G325 is the USCIS Biographic Information form. I really don't understand why she will make such a notation
Amir/Houston said:I just want to say thank you every one for your help and support,
I believe according to rules , I don't need to file a respond since I automattically reject the DA answer. I read this in the pro se package.
I think , I have to wait for the judge to schedule a court date.
Thanks
Amir/Houston said:I just want to say thank you every one for your help and support,
I believe according to rules , I don't need to file a respond since I automattically reject the DA answer. I read this in the pro se package.
I think , I have to wait for the judge to schedule a court date.
Thanks
sfaizullah said:Amir/Houston,
You may want to show to make your residence clear (just make available documents to show that your reside there). When reading the memo you posted it left that impression on my as if they can not verify your address (it maybe an over-sight on mybehalf but you want to make sure).
Best Regards
lt1GM said:I sent my summons for the DO Director to the local DO address. I think that's actually beneficial since they are the ones closest to the case.
Which is why - I think - I received a new fingerprinting notice from the DO Director two weeks after he received the summons.
brightstar said:Guys
When someone files the Mandamus lawsuit in I-485, does the court have jurscdiction over the case or USCIS? If someone knows the answer for sure, please inform.
sfaizullah said:Thanks Suzy! I am intending to file this Thursday.
Suzy/Mohamed/others,
Two brief questions: 1. I have seen some applications also include the departments as well as their directors. Is there any advantage in doing this?
2. Should CIA director be inculded? I was of the opiion till yesterday that I will not... now this G325 comment, which I think is mostly due to lack of the local agent's knowledge, made me unsure..
Best Regards