You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Anyone with a lawsuit against USCIS or thinking about a lawsuit (Merged)
- Thread starter Publicus
- Start date
Lotechguy:
Here is the link to the pacer website:
http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/
Yes. you need to register it first. Click the 'Register for Pacer' to register at the left side of the page. Or you can click 'Pacer Overview' above 'Register for Pacer' to get more information about Pacer. Once you registered, it will cost you $0.08 to browse each page. I registered this morning and played a little bit, but I wasn't able to find any attorney information. I might did it wrong.
Here is the link to the pacer website:
http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/
Yes. you need to register it first. Click the 'Register for Pacer' to register at the left side of the page. Or you can click 'Pacer Overview' above 'Register for Pacer' to get more information about Pacer. Once you registered, it will cost you $0.08 to browse each page. I registered this morning and played a little bit, but I wasn't able to find any attorney information. I might did it wrong.
lotechguy said:Hi Jack,
Can you post instructions on how you got into Pacer ? Do you to register first and get a login ? I am trying to find attorneys in western minchigan who can help file a 1446(b).
TheRock20148
Registered Users (C)
Ask USCIS director a question on July 24th.
Please do post other questions maybe similiar who knows if my question will be selected or not. My posted questions are:
Dear Sir, Immigration policy is first come and first serve? am I right?. I have few question like to hear from your directly.
Q1. Why many legal immigration facing delay in name check for naturalization? Do FBI really work on every individual file for 8 hours a day for 2 or 3 years to cleared it? This seems to be not fair to those who applied long time back but still in pending whereas others get naturalized even last come.
Q2. Many immigration service benefits offer expedite process such as H1-b (by paying $1000 extra)and you get approved within 2 weeks. Why not USCIS offer expedite Name check process and charge extra fee?
Q3. INFOPASS don't provide detail status of case neither 1-800 customer service nor we are able to find detail status of case online. Don't you think USCIS should provide up to date information on case?
Q4. Like USCIS have 120 days after the interview to decide on case by law, don't you think there should also be some procedure/law that require FBI to clear name check within xxx days?
Your answer will be highly appreciated and help understand many thousand other people who want to hear your answers on these issues.
Site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/
Please do post other questions maybe similiar who knows if my question will be selected or not. My posted questions are:
Dear Sir, Immigration policy is first come and first serve? am I right?. I have few question like to hear from your directly.
Q1. Why many legal immigration facing delay in name check for naturalization? Do FBI really work on every individual file for 8 hours a day for 2 or 3 years to cleared it? This seems to be not fair to those who applied long time back but still in pending whereas others get naturalized even last come.
Q2. Many immigration service benefits offer expedite process such as H1-b (by paying $1000 extra)and you get approved within 2 weeks. Why not USCIS offer expedite Name check process and charge extra fee?
Q3. INFOPASS don't provide detail status of case neither 1-800 customer service nor we are able to find detail status of case online. Don't you think USCIS should provide up to date information on case?
Q4. Like USCIS have 120 days after the interview to decide on case by law, don't you think there should also be some procedure/law that require FBI to clear name check within xxx days?
Your answer will be highly appreciated and help understand many thousand other people who want to hear your answers on these issues.
Site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/
Thanks for posting your questions. I did use it(modified) to ask Mr. Gonazaloe.TheRock20148 said:Please do post other questions maybe similiar who knows if my question will be selected or not. My posted questions are:
Site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/
cajack said:Lotechguy:
Here is the link to the pacer website:
http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/
Yes. you need to register it first. Click the 'Register for Pacer' to register at the left side of the page. Or you can click 'Pacer Overview' above 'Register for Pacer' to get more information about Pacer. Once you registered, it will cost you $0.08 to browse each page. I registered this morning and played a little bit, but I wasn't able to find any attorney information. I might did it wrong.
In the query field, type last name Chertoff, as Party. This will bring up all cases. Look in the case summary for the cases - it will show you whether it is 1446, and show the name and phone # of the attorney who filed it. Each attorney name will cost 0.08 cents though
drgeorge
TheRock20148
Registered Users (C)
fightback!!!
What you have posted? everyone please post your questions here as exactly you posted for Gonzalaz. This will help everyone what to ask and so on.
What you have posted? everyone please post your questions here as exactly you posted for Gonzalaz. This will help everyone what to ask and so on.
Thank you drgeorge. I found some attorneies information.
drgeorge said:In the query field, type last name Chertoff, as Party. This will bring up all cases. Look in the case summary for the cases - it will show you whether it is 1446, and show the name and phone # of the attorney who filed it. Each attorney name will cost 0.08 cents though
drgeorge
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/
Guys:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/
Its important to mention the report of the office of the Ombusman:
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interweb/assetlibrary/CISOmbudsman_AnnualReport_2006.pdf
(Page 25)
Considering the cost and inconveniences caused by the delays, the value of the FBI name check process should be reexamined. In almost every name check case that the FBI conducts for USCIS, the foreign national is physically present in the United States during the name check process. Thus, delays in the name check process actually prolong an individual’s presence (albeit in an interim status) in the United States while the check is pending. In that sense, the current USCIS name check policy may increase the risk to national security by prolonging the time a potential criminal or terrorist remains in the country. Further, checks do not differentiate whether the individual has been in the United States for many years or a few days, is from and/or has traveled frequently to a country designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, or is a member of the U.S. military. Most individuals subject to lengthy name checks are either already green card holders or have been issued EADs allowing them to receive Social Security cards and state drivers’ licenses. Additionally, most green card applicants are also eligible to receive advance parole to enable them to travel outside the United States and return as long as their cases are
pending, which can be for years under the current process.
Page 26:
In addition, the IG recommended that USCIS establish a comprehensive, risk-based plan for the selection and completion of security checks.46 Despite Secretary Chertoff’s statement and the IG’s recommendation, USCIS recently stated that “[r]esolving pending cases is time-consuming and labor-intensive; some cases legitimately take months or even several years to resolve.”47 Unfortunately, the process is not working and consideration should be given to re-engineering it to include a risk-based approach to immigration screening and national security.
Guys:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/
Its important to mention the report of the office of the Ombusman:
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interweb/assetlibrary/CISOmbudsman_AnnualReport_2006.pdf
(Page 25)
Considering the cost and inconveniences caused by the delays, the value of the FBI name check process should be reexamined. In almost every name check case that the FBI conducts for USCIS, the foreign national is physically present in the United States during the name check process. Thus, delays in the name check process actually prolong an individual’s presence (albeit in an interim status) in the United States while the check is pending. In that sense, the current USCIS name check policy may increase the risk to national security by prolonging the time a potential criminal or terrorist remains in the country. Further, checks do not differentiate whether the individual has been in the United States for many years or a few days, is from and/or has traveled frequently to a country designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, or is a member of the U.S. military. Most individuals subject to lengthy name checks are either already green card holders or have been issued EADs allowing them to receive Social Security cards and state drivers’ licenses. Additionally, most green card applicants are also eligible to receive advance parole to enable them to travel outside the United States and return as long as their cases are
pending, which can be for years under the current process.
Page 26:
In addition, the IG recommended that USCIS establish a comprehensive, risk-based plan for the selection and completion of security checks.46 Despite Secretary Chertoff’s statement and the IG’s recommendation, USCIS recently stated that “[r]esolving pending cases is time-consuming and labor-intensive; some cases legitimately take months or even several years to resolve.”47 Unfortunately, the process is not working and consideration should be given to re-engineering it to include a risk-based approach to immigration screening and national security.
Update - Another one
this morning I have received THE call form USDA, my FBI name check has finally cleared and USCIS is ready to grant my N application. I was also informed that USCIS is scheduling my oath ceremony for 7/27 and the invitation letter is already in the mail. In the meanwhile I received a draft motion to dismiss which I agreed to it's language since it does contain all the guarantees I want.
I can't articulate my gratitude and appreciation to this forum and its member, without you opening my eyes to many aspect of the process I would have been still for the lazy a#$ to grant my application, and only good knows for how many years.
Thank you all for your help even though it was not directed to me, I learned a lot from just being a regular to the forum. Thanks again and good luck to all of you in line, if I can do it every one else can.
As Buggin mentioned earlier, nothing is over until you have the certificate in your hand, and accordingly I shall proceed.
this morning I have received THE call form USDA, my FBI name check has finally cleared and USCIS is ready to grant my N application. I was also informed that USCIS is scheduling my oath ceremony for 7/27 and the invitation letter is already in the mail. In the meanwhile I received a draft motion to dismiss which I agreed to it's language since it does contain all the guarantees I want.
I can't articulate my gratitude and appreciation to this forum and its member, without you opening my eyes to many aspect of the process I would have been still for the lazy a#$ to grant my application, and only good knows for how many years.
Thank you all for your help even though it was not directed to me, I learned a lot from just being a regular to the forum. Thanks again and good luck to all of you in line, if I can do it every one else can.
As Buggin mentioned earlier, nothing is over until you have the certificate in your hand, and accordingly I shall proceed.
Faizullah,sfaizullah said:Hi,
One more update. I left a message to AUSA and he then called. So, it looks like we are headed to the court. He was cryptic in his answer (very nice fellow though and respectful). At this point I know that he is going to submit reply sometimes next week. I asked him, based on the letter from Mr. Hooton my case should be straight forward but it does not look like we are headed that way. I will know more next week when he files his reply.
I am just confused and don't know what is going on. I am also now not sure if Pro Se was the right thing.
One question from all, particularly Suzy/SuperK/Mohamed/others, is why would they take this position given that Mr. Hooton has written that my name check is processed and finalized? My FOIPA was "no records" as I wrote before.
Second question, should I look into hiring a lawyer? Don't know what they have in store for me. I will wait till next week when AUSA file his reply to the court to know for sure.
Last question, can the judge grant what AUSA ask for without trial (and without me)?
Best Regards
My understanding after talking to some geniuses on this form is that even after FBI clearing your name check USCIS can take years... I believe if i am not mistaken there were few cases in the beginning on this forum where people knew that there FBI name checks were clear but still were stuck with USCIS... this is nothing but Administrative negligence and no set procedures... one reason i believe is lack of literate employees... anyways... USCIS had your file for long time... even if we consider straight forward process... the USCIS has to process your application (final stages) after getting name check results from FBI... now I dont remember when did you get the letter from Hooton... how many days weeks ago... did you add this letter in your pro se saying that even after receiving a response from FBI these sob's are not moving your file... and also that these sob's could not get an expedite on your name check and it was your effort that you wrote to WH and got this name check processed otherwise they would have taken years more... so you have done more than your remedy exhaustion part...
answer to second question... i beleive... after filing pro se... lawyers can be expensive... but that is just an opinion... there are always good lawyers around... i would suggest to wait for the answer... at the most they will file a response... and those days are over where we in this forum used to file pro se and most of the times the name checks and the AOS applications were processed within 60 days after filing... i think including me many others in this forum has already started preparing their response to oppose their AUSA's reponse and or motion to dismiss... I would suggest tp start preparing one... and trust me i am not trying to frighten you... these sob's now have started to resist these cases more because every one has started filing lawsuits... but that doesnot change the reality... and the reality is that we are on the right and they ar on the wrong... they have no controls set within their organization... and they want us to be on mercy of them... i think even a blind man can tell us direction better than USCIS... I used to think that my country was slow meaning government agencies... but now i see that USCIS has the world record to be slowest government agency... so personally i would not recommend lawyer unless you have extra money to spend.. rather than spending money be more friendly with your AUSA and see if he would like to have some kind of arrangement with you by having more time like 30 days to get your case cleared.. this will also give you some time to prepare your response to his/her response in advance...
I have heard that judge does not blindly grant such judgements to any party... i would suggest making a good response to your AUSA's response... but i would not wait for his reply... because basically they talk about the same material.... there is a lot of material available here... please let me know if you need help...
moody22 said:Ok Sfaizullah,
I don't agree with you regarding that you did the wrong thing by filing in the court. at least your case is moving forward, and you'll find out what crap they have for you and deal with it, better than sitting there waiting for your entire life for the oath letter.
Regards,
Moody
I totally agree with moody... if you had not filed your complaint... not only you would wait for years and then the same crap will be thrown to you that we didnot have your all information... so sit tight and be prepared... you know even though my AUSA is giving me hard time... i have come to a conclusion... that if I can not stand for myself now ehn I know that I did every thing right then these USCIS sob's will keep beating me in the whole process... if they have any -ve info against us then they should show it to the court... this whole thing is soon going to bring a lot fo of crap on USCIS and its administration... and I have a feeling that the whole management will be changed like total overhauling... inclduing the AUSA's attitude who tell us that it is descretion of USCIS to decide on our cases and that is why they can wait for years on our files and keep earning EADs and other fees from us...
Come on man... we can do it... i fealt very weak when my AUSA filed his motion to dismiss... but after i filed my response i fealt good... we have put lot of energy in it... this is the time where we have to show our consistency... we are not bad people... we should not be reated like ones... what ever they have reason for the name check delay or for adjudication of your file... is not your fault... is their administratie weakness... and you want justice... i see now people working towards their responses against AUSA's motion to dismiss like people used to file their complaints (if you see the forst 100 pages of this forum, you would know what i mean)... the info is out there we have to get it together... i would suggest that atleast make a response.. and if you are not satisfied also talk to few lawyers... but i feel in your case where your name check is already clear it should take lesser time...sfaizullah said:Thanks Moody! I meant that in my case Pro Se may not have been the right way to go to court not that I went to court. I then thought it will be very fast as more than 120 days are past on my interview. Now I don't know what kind of legal stuff they will pull and a lawyer maybe more suitable.
Thinking back, as much as I knew then, going Pro Se was the right decision. Now with new reality I don't know.
Best Regards
the days start from the day US Atty recv your complaint... if you have sent your paper work to civil process clerk US Attorney's office then i think it seems that now like USCIS US Atty are also backed up with the cases and no one is available to take your case... I dont know in this case what is your standing... is there someone who help SAMSON please...samson_33 said:I filed WOM on 6/03/06 and sent the summons were sent out same day and received by defendents on 6/07/06. I called my local Attorney's office to check who has been assigned to my case, and they do not have any information yet. What do I need to do? Attorney's office asked me to check with the court and the court said Attorney's office will provide this information. I just sent the certificate of service to the court for USPS receipts t'day. PLease advice what I should do.. Also teh 60 day counting starts after the defendents recived the complaint (Date on USPS receipt) or when court receives teh USPS receipts from me.
-- Thanks
Filing 1447b
I have just received the Pro Se package from the District Court in order to file 1447b and found it pretty complcated. A lawyer with whom I talked about this application (who does not help in this specific case himself) told me it would be really difficult to do without a legal help. Are the lawyers the only possibility, or the clerk could assist too?
For example, in the Complaint itself, it is not quite clear to me if I need to enclose the FBI answer to my FOIPA request (no records), as well as the FBI replies to inquiries by our Congressman and Senator on my behalf. Indeed, 1747b is a complaint regarding the USCIS, and not FBI. Will it not defocus the whole complaint instead of substantiate it? Maybe, to enclose the minimum of exhibits, such as the priority day notice, 652 and the first USCIS response citing the background check as the delay cause?
Thank God, there is a template for most of the complaint text, awailable at the beginning of this thread. However, I could not find instructions regarding filling other forms, such as the Civil Cover Sheet. This is a letter/form-based process, and the papers must be perfect.
Anyway, any advice would be welcome!
I have just received the Pro Se package from the District Court in order to file 1447b and found it pretty complcated. A lawyer with whom I talked about this application (who does not help in this specific case himself) told me it would be really difficult to do without a legal help. Are the lawyers the only possibility, or the clerk could assist too?
For example, in the Complaint itself, it is not quite clear to me if I need to enclose the FBI answer to my FOIPA request (no records), as well as the FBI replies to inquiries by our Congressman and Senator on my behalf. Indeed, 1747b is a complaint regarding the USCIS, and not FBI. Will it not defocus the whole complaint instead of substantiate it? Maybe, to enclose the minimum of exhibits, such as the priority day notice, 652 and the first USCIS response citing the background check as the delay cause?
Thank God, there is a template for most of the complaint text, awailable at the beginning of this thread. However, I could not find instructions regarding filling other forms, such as the Civil Cover Sheet. This is a letter/form-based process, and the papers must be perfect.
Anyway, any advice would be welcome!
Congrats...
mmksj said:this morning I have received THE call form USDA, my FBI name check has finally cleared and USCIS is ready to grant my N application. I was also informed that USCIS is scheduling my oath ceremony for 7/27 and the invitation letter is already in the mail. In the meanwhile I received a draft motion to dismiss which I agreed to it's language since it does contain all the guarantees I want.
I can't articulate my gratitude and appreciation to this forum and its member, without you opening my eyes to many aspect of the process I would have been still for the lazy a#$ to grant my application, and only good knows for how many years.
Thank you all for your help even though it was not directed to me, I learned a lot from just being a regular to the forum. Thanks again and good luck to all of you in line, if I can do it every one else can.
As Buggin mentioned earlier, nothing is over until you have the certificate in your hand, and accordingly I shall proceed.
Andy2005
Andy
As far as I know you meed to include the FOIPA as one of the EHXIHIBTS to indicate to the court that you tried to resolve the matter peacefully.
That's the idea of EXHIBITS: To show that you tried everything possible from your side, and to show that the other side is not helping.
I think the way it works is:
1- You have to have the word document explaining your case
2- In the Pro Se package you'll find the cover sheet
Once the Word documents with all exhibits is ready, and the cover sheet is ready, you go to court anf file the lawsuit
.. The rest of the instructions is on the first page (wait for summons, serve defendants ..etc.)
Experts on the forum ... Please help
Andy
As far as I know you meed to include the FOIPA as one of the EHXIHIBTS to indicate to the court that you tried to resolve the matter peacefully.
That's the idea of EXHIBITS: To show that you tried everything possible from your side, and to show that the other side is not helping.
I think the way it works is:
1- You have to have the word document explaining your case
2- In the Pro Se package you'll find the cover sheet
Once the Word documents with all exhibits is ready, and the cover sheet is ready, you go to court anf file the lawsuit
.. The rest of the instructions is on the first page (wait for summons, serve defendants ..etc.)
Experts on the forum ... Please help
1447B Question
Experts:
Filing 1447B , these are the defendants??
1- Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney General
2- Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
3- Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
4- Robert S. Mueller, Director of Federal Bureau of Investigation
5- XXXX XXXXX : Director of USCIS District Office where N400 was filed.
??????????
Thanks Experts .., you are one of the main reasons why I am still keeping my sanity inspite of Name Check Torture
Experts:
Filing 1447B , these are the defendants??
1- Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney General
2- Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
3- Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
4- Robert S. Mueller, Director of Federal Bureau of Investigation
5- XXXX XXXXX : Director of USCIS District Office where N400 was filed.
??????????
Thanks Experts .., you are one of the main reasons why I am still keeping my sanity inspite of Name Check Torture
Andy,
Your question is regarding local rule. You need to find the people who file 1447(b) at the same area to help you. Where are you going to file this complain?
syt
Your question is regarding local rule. You need to find the people who file 1447(b) at the same area to help you. Where are you going to file this complain?
syt
Andy2005 said:I have just received the Pro Se package from the District Court in order to file 1447b and found it pretty complcated. A lawyer with whom I talked about this application (who does not help in this specific case himself) told me it would be really difficult to do without a legal help. Are the lawyers the only possibility, or the clerk could assist too?
For example, in the Complaint itself, it is not quite clear to me if I need to enclose the FBI answer to my FOIPA request (no records), as well as the FBI replies to inquiries by our Congressman and Senator on my behalf. Indeed, 1747b is a complaint regarding the USCIS, and not FBI. Will it not defocus the whole complaint instead of substantiate it? Maybe, to enclose the minimum of exhibits, such as the priority day notice, 652 and the first USCIS response citing the background check as the delay cause?
Thank God, there is a template for most of the complaint text, awailable at the beginning of this thread. However, I could not find instructions regarding filling other forms, such as the Civil Cover Sheet. This is a letter/form-based process, and the papers must be perfect.
Anyway, any advice would be welcome!
Yes, they are.
lovingusa said:Experts:
Filing 1447B , these are the defendants??
1- Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney General
2- Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
3- Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
4- Robert S. Mueller, Director of Federal Bureau of Investigation
5- XXXX XXXXX : Director of USCIS District Office where N400 was filed.
??????????
Thanks Experts .., you are one of the main reasons why I am still keeping my sanity inspite of Name Check Torture