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

khan4nwfp said:
I cant fathom the decisions these judges are making. This is bull ****. I think they dont want to do anything with the case and are just trying to get them out of thier pile as soon as possible. If you cant trust the judicial system then what is next. What happens to these poor people who just want this ordeal to be over and then get hit by a decision like this. What can they do next? Call the president? :mad:
I am also getting ready to file the 1447b but what will happen if the judge sides with USCIS? Is there any hope after that? Can you appeal the decision?
I am contemplating whether I should have a lawyer do this or still do it by myself. Any comments thought????
Click to expand...

Reading these cases makes me sick as same law can be interpreted totally differently by different judges. Looks like that judges are also getting affected by media and supporting govt. about this indefinite national security clearance craze. Obviously, for somebody whose case get remanded back to USCIS may never see his application adjudicated. Why the heck judges understand that these cases are about FBI and USCIS incompentency and inefficieny and NOT about national security. Did any judge try to ask the FBI or USCIS what have they done regarding the clearance? I bet that in all the pending cases, they have done absolutely nothing and with the courts blessing, obviously they would be further encouraged to delay applications forever.

Anybody thought of requesting ACLU to file a friend of the court brief in any of these cases?

About the lawyer, I had thought of doing by myself and prepared the case at one stage, but then looking at the complicated cases decided to give it to an experienced lawyer. Obviously the choice is yours.
 
khalafah2000 said:
How about the following paragraph. Please see the red bold part
"In August 2006, the FBI forwarded the result of its search to USCIS for its review. The Supervisor District Adjudication Officer, Section Manager of the USCIS New Jersey district office reviewed the results of the background check and determined that the USCIS must continue evaluating Plaintiff's eligibility for naturalization"
Click to expand...

I managed to download and quickly browse though the rest of the relevant info to this case (El Kassemi v. DHS et al. case no. 06-1010 District Court of New Jersey). I totally agree with khalafah2000 that these kind of decisions will pop up in the future in different courts till this type of case is settled in the Circuit Court or ultimately in the Supreme Court. The bright side of the story is that because the complaint filled, FBI completed the background check and the case normally would be ready to be adjudicated. We don't know what kind of information was revealed by this background check which warranted the Director of the USCIS DO to continue evaluating the application. In the vast majority of the cases presented on this Forum, after the background check was completed, USCIS quickly adjudicated the case.

From the court material of this case I understood that USCIS will adjudicate within the framework of 120 days counting from the completion of the background check (i.e., they will finish the additional investigation, whatever that means). From the point of view of the applicant, this means that by the end of the year he should have a decision. From the point of view of rest of us who have pending cases, it is bad, because there is now another unfavorable court decision (in my opinion, wrong and unjust) which will be used against us as a precedence.
 
paz1960 said:
I managed to download and quickly browse though the rest of the relevant info to this case (El Kassemi v. DHS et al. case no. 06-1010 District Court of New Jersey). I totally agree with khalafah2000 that these kind of decisions will pop up in the future in different courts till this type of case is settled in the Circuit Court or ultimately in the Supreme Court. The bright side of the story is that because the complaint filled, FBI completed the background check and the case normally would be ready to be adjudicated. We don't know what kind of information was revealed by this background check which warranted the Director of the USCIS DO to continue evaluating the application. In the vast majority of the cases presented on this Forum, after the background check was completed, USCIS quickly adjudicated the case.

From the court material of this case I understood that USCIS will adjudicate within the framework of 120 days counting from the completion of the background check (i.e., they will finish the additional investigation, whatever that means). From the point of view of the applicant, this means that by the end of the year he should have a decision. From the point of view of rest of us who have pending cases, it is bad, because there is now another unfavorable court decision (in my opinion, wrong and unjust) which will be used against us as a precedence.
Click to expand...

Can you please post the rest of the court materials about this case?
 
1447b NJ district court cases

yesterday, I looked at all the open 1447b cases in Newark, NJ district. I may be totally wrong, but I suspected a pattern. AUSA more or less are fighting those cases vigrously where plaintiffs belong to a certain region of the world. In other cases, more or less, they settled them in couple of months after the filing.

anybody have any thoughts?
 
El Kassemi.v.DHS et al. case files - part1

Here are the relevant files of the dismissed NJ district court case posted by khalafah2000 in post #6010.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Any negative effect?

Thanks for the great forum.
I really want to go ahead and still got concerns because my wife is using EAD which is depent on me. My case is NIW based and there is almost no reason that USCIS can use to deny. But who knows. I have seen many sucess stories here and was not able to go through the whole 400 pages. Anyone one here saw a bad (unsuccesul) case?

Thanks a lot.
 
cost of lawyer!!

khalafah2000 said:
About the lawyer, I had thought of doing by myself and prepared the case at one stage, but then looking at the complicated cases decided to give it to an experienced lawyer. Obviously the choice is yours.
Click to expand...

Do you mind if I ask how much the lawyer is charging you for this. Also is he expecting you to pay everything upfront, installments or as the case goes along? What was your initial cost to get the process started? Thanks
 
khan4nwfp said:
Do you mind if I ask how much the lawyer is charging you for this. Also is he expecting you to pay everything upfront, installments or as the case goes along? What was your initial cost to get the process started? Thanks
Click to expand...

$300/hr with initial retainer of $3000. The following is his profile. I suggest that you make up your mind before going to a lawyer. Lawyers generally don't like people calling them for *just* getting some information.

Thomas E. Moseley
One Gateway Center, Suite 2600
Newark, New Jersey 07102-5397
(Essex Co.)

Telephone: 973-622-8176
Facsimile: 973-645-9493
Email: Send an Email

Practice Areas: Regulatory Litigation including Antitrust and Food and Drug Law Cases; Immigration and Employment Law; Complex Commercial Litigation; White Collar Criminal Matters; Consular Law; Family Immigration Law; Business and Professional Immigration

Admitted: 1973, New York; 1974, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York; 1975, U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit and U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals; 1982, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth and Eleventh Circuits; 1988, New Jersey and U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey; 1991, U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit; 1993, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York

Law School: Harvard University, J.D., 1972

College: Harvard University, A.B., cum laude, 1969

Member: New Jersey State and American (Member, Sections on: Administrative Law, Litigation; International Law) Bar Associations; American Immigration Lawyers Association (Chair, Committee on Regulatory Comments, 1990-1991); Federal Bar Association (Chair, Immigration Law Committee, 1993-1995).

Biography: Member, Harvard International Law Journal, 1972. Instructor, Attorney General's Advocacy Institute, 1980. Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York, 1976-1979. Director's Award for Superior Performance, 1979. Chief Civil Division, U.S. Attorneys Office, Southern District of Florida, 1980-1982. Special Achievement Award, 1981. Assistant U.S. Attorney, Southern District of New York, 1982-1987; Chief, Immigration Unit, 1983-1984. Author: "Immigration Rulemaking Under the APA," Immigration Briefings (May 1991); "Modern Management - Getting from There to Here: IMMACT 90's Changes to the L-1 Intracompany Transferee Visa," Inside Immigration: The Practice Advisory (Dec. 1991); "Navigating Between Seylla and Charybdis: New Rules & Liabilities for Employers Under the Antidiscrimination Provisions of IRCA," New Jersey Lawyer, (Feb/Mar. 1995). Senior Editor, AILA, 1994-1995, Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook. Lecturer, 1994, PLI 27th Annual Immigration and Naturalization Institute.

Languages: German

Born: Columbia, Missouri, October 23, 1947

ISLN: 902339857

Web Site: http://www.tmoseleylaw.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
GREAT NEWS!!!

We just got the call from US Attorney office! USCIS sent them an e-mail that my mom's application is ready to be approved. He needed our permission to dismiss the case so that USCIS could process the application. I asked him to forward me all his correspondance with USCIS, so when I get it, I'll give you more details. But for now, looks like everything is great! I am soooo happy! :)

Here is some history:

My mom applied for US Citizenship in September of 2003;
Interview - May, 2004;
Security check pending;
Applied for the second time in January 2006 (this was stupid, I wish I found this forum sooner :mad: );
Interview - April, 2006;
1774b lowsuit filed in Boston - September 29, 2006;
USCIS is ready to approve the application - October 18, 2006!

One more thing. Someone here was worrying about filing for his wife. I prepared the lowsuite for my mom, because her English is not very good. I didn't put my name on it, just hers. I went to the court with her and talked to the clerk, they didn't have any problems with that. Today the AUSA called her house. She knew who it was but couldn't understand much. So, she asked for his number and told him that her daughter would call him back in a few minutes. I called him, and he didn't have any problems talking to me. He was actually very nice.:)

It's not over yet, but I hope it will be soon. I can't thank enough everyone here on the board! I couldn't have done it without you!
 
1447b Pro Se lawyer

Hi everyone,
I am one of name check victims, stuck at FBI since 6/8/2004.
Any one can suggest good lawyer for 1447b Pro Se in Chicago area ?
Thanks a lot.
 
liuym said:
Hi everyone,
I am one of name check victims, stuck at FBI since 6/8/2004.
Any one can suggest good lawyer for 1447b Pro Se in Chicago area ?
Thanks a lot.
Click to expand...

liuym! There is no such thing "Pro Se lawyer". Pro Se means that you file and represent your case by yourself. As for a lawyer in the Chicago area, check the previous posts in this thread, I vaguely remember that some names were posted. I am in a different area, have no knowledge about Chicago immigration lawyers.

Alternatively, you can go to PACER and research the similar cases filled in your district court. For each case you can get the name and contact info of the Plaintiff, if this is not "Pro Se", must be a lawyer. Wach for the output of his(her) cases, and make a judgment for yourself.

As many contributors mentioned before on this forum, you can file a 1447b or WOM by yourself (Pro Se) if you study the postings on this forum. You can save a lot of money by doing yourself.
 
Thanks Paz1960

Hi Paz1960,
Thanks for your answer.
I am new to this thread. There are huge amount of posts.

Thanks again
 
great, congrats!
IreneB said:
GREAT NEWS!!!

We just got the call from US Attorney office! USCIS sent them an e-mail that my mom's application is ready to be approved. He needed our permission to dismiss the case so that USCIS could process the application. I asked him to forward me all his correspondance with USCIS, so when I get it, I'll give you more details. But for now, looks like everything is great! I am soooo happy! :)

Here is some history:

My mom applied for US Citizenship in September of 2003;
Interview - May, 2004;
Security check pending;
Applied for the second time in January 2006 (this was stupid, I wish I found this forum sooner :mad: );
Interview - April, 2006;
1774b lowsuit filed in Boston - September 29, 2006;
USCIS is ready to approve the application - October 18, 2006!

One more thing. Someone here was worrying about filing for his wife. I prepared the lowsuite for my mom, because her English is not very good. I didn't put my name on it, just hers. I went to the court with her and talked to the clerk, they didn't have any problems with that. Today the AUSA called her house. She knew who it was but couldn't understand much. So, she asked for his number and told him that her daughter would call him back in a few minutes. I called him, and he didn't have any problems talking to me. He was actually very nice.:)

It's not over yet, but I hope it will be soon. I can't thank enough everyone here on the board! I couldn't have done it without you!
Click to expand...
 
Hi Folks,
Just want to share some info that lotechguy and I gathered from Michigan 6th district court.

Lotechguy: I went into pacer, Eastern MI district, searched for cases Filed since may01/06 code 890, defendant chertoff. I got these: (list below)

(dates are the filing dates)

All of them are still open except one where the guy filed N400 in 2002, interviewed in 2003 and was pending. That was dismissed 10/16 after that guy won and was given oath. Actually it was 2 people who filed jointly as one petetion with an attorney. I marked that as successful below.

What I do not understand is that why is there not an AUSA assigned to cases file in 06/21, 06/27, 7/18 yet ?

---------------------------------------------------
6 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv12732 06/21/2006 890

8 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv12851 06/27/2006 890

12 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13255 07/18/2006 890

13 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13320 07/24/2006 890

14 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 4:2006cv13634 08/15/2006 890 10/12/2006 (only one Successful)

CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13900 09/01/2006 890

18 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13901 09/01/2006 890

20 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv14265 09/27/2006 890

786riz: Called court today, found that each judge has its own case manager who track all of the documents and keep case history. Following are the results of different cases you mentioned:
1. Cases with only complains, no AUSA assigned; per different case managers, plaintiff has to serve the summons to AUSA and file the prove to the court but that did not happen in any of the cases. That is why only complain is showing in the docket. Summons have a 120 expiry time, so as soon that will happened, case manager will call the plaintiff for update.
2. 13 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13320 07/24/2006 890; Per case manager, recently had a conference and both parties decided to resolve the issue in 90 days. Also, judge ordered that security check shall be done by that date. That’s why next conference date is set for Jan, 07.
3. 6 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv12732 06/21/2006 890 : this is a asylum case filed under other than 1447b also complain does not follow the rules. So I do not know where this case will go.

So, my understanding is that the cases without AUSA, have already been resolved but the plaintiff did not bother to call the court and update them (may be I am dreaming).
So, overall situation looks pretty promising.
 
I filed my case in Northern District of Indiana on 8/21 and the response is due on 10/24 and I still have no AUSA assigned!!! I called the AUSA office today and they said that nobody is assigned yet and they will call me when somebody gets assigned!!!! There are only 6 days until the response, WHAT SHOULD I DO??? HIRE A LAWYER, OR WAIT???? THE WAITING IS NOT HELPING MY NERVES :) If they don't respond by 10/24 should I give them more time or file motion for default judgement?




786riz said:
Hi Folks,
Just want to share some info that lotechguy and I gathered from Michigan 6th district court.

Lotechguy: I went into pacer, Eastern MI district, searched for cases Filed since may01/06 code 890, defendant chertoff. I got these: (list below)

(dates are the filing dates)

All of them are still open except one where the guy filed N400 in 2002, interviewed in 2003 and was pending. That was dismissed 10/16 after that guy won and was given oath. Actually it was 2 people who filed jointly as one petetion with an attorney. I marked that as successful below.

What I do not understand is that why is there not an AUSA assigned to cases file in 06/21, 06/27, 7/18 yet ?

---------------------------------------------------
6 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv12732 06/21/2006 890

8 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv12851 06/27/2006 890

12 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13255 07/18/2006 890

13 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13320 07/24/2006 890

14 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 4:2006cv13634 08/15/2006 890 10/12/2006 (only one Successful)

CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13900 09/01/2006 890

18 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13901 09/01/2006 890

20 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv14265 09/27/2006 890

786riz: Called court today, found that each judge has its own case manager who track all of the documents and keep case history. Following are the results of different cases you mentioned:
1. Cases with only complains, no AUSA assigned; per different case managers, plaintiff has to serve the summons to AUSA and file the prove to the court but that did not happen in any of the cases. That is why only complain is showing in the docket. Summons have a 120 expiry time, so as soon that will happened, case manager will call the plaintiff for update.
2. 13 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv13320 07/24/2006 890; Per case manager, recently had a conference and both parties decided to resolve the issue in 90 days. Also, judge ordered that security check shall be done by that date. That’s why next conference date is set for Jan, 07.
3. 6 CHERTOFF, MICHAEL miedce 2:2006cv12732 06/21/2006 890 : this is a asylum case filed under other than 1447b also complain does not follow the rules. So I do not know where this case will go.

So, my understanding is that the cases without AUSA, have already been resolved but the plaintiff did not bother to call the court and update them (may be I am dreaming).
So, overall situation looks pretty promising.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top