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

wenlock said:
Does any one know any FBI or USCIS contact that handles Name check directly for law suits. I need to send that information to my US attorney. He said if I know some one who handles matters directly he might be able to talk to him directly.

I know USCIS has some focus group people who handles FBI name check requests. They devoted five people for that purpose.

Please let me know if some one knows any thing abuot this.
Click to expand...
Hello wenlock,
I gave to my AUSA the name of Michael Cannon, he is the Section Chief in the National Name Check Program Section, Records Management Division at FBI Headquarters. AUSA probably identified some more names as you saw in his e-mail I posted couple of days ago, but I don't have that info.

I attached three documents I found previously on the Net about the Name Check Program, written by a fellow applicant. Some of the info may be outdated but there is a bunch of contact info listed, you may try these.
 
Moon_g said:
This morning, I just received emails from USCIS: my and my whole family's I-485 were approved. You know, I have been stuck in Name Check black hole for more than 32 months, and it took 57 days only to get everything done after I filed the WOM. Huge Release!! And I am sooooooo happy to see my 4-year Green Card journey came to the end.
Here I have to say Big Thanks to all the folks who shared their experience in this thread. especially, Delightfish, Paz1960, Junhuaw etc. Also I need to appreciate my AUSA, Ms. McNuty, Sheila. She is very nice AUSA always keeping me confident and encouraged.
Good luck to all of you filers and very very appreciate for contributing to this wonderful forum!!

moon_g
EB2
I140 RD: 09/18/2003
I140 AD: 3/03/2004
I485 RD: 4/01/2004
WOM filed in Northern District off Illinois (Chicago): 10/24/2006
Name Check: Cleared 12/13/2006
Last FP: 12/19/2006
I485 approved: 12/21/2006 morning :D
Click to expand...
Congratulations moon_g! Excellent news, a real Christmas present. As you may remember, we filed our lawsuits on the same day, but in different district courts. I hope that sooner or later I will join you on the winners side.
 
hayyyoot said:
Guys;
What happened in my case is a precedent, my USA will start using my case as a precedent to abuse and racially profile future plaintiffs.
The judge totally ignored the law, and remanded my case without any instructions, he could have taken the time and remanding it with instructions that the CIS adjudicate the case as soon as possible, and I would have been not so upset, but, the jedge has just totally ignored the law. At this point, becoming a citizen is really the first on my priority list anymore, I don't want my case to be a precedent, is anybody aware of such a case??? the jurisdiction isn't disputed, so, they didn't dismiss the case, they accepted the jurisdiction, and rejected the law :eek: , I MUST file an appeal, we can't be doormats here.
Guys, any help in filing an appeal is very appreciated, I have to file it by 1/17/07, I am just infuriated.
Please post your opinions.
Click to expand...
Normally, after this judgement, the judge writes an opinion & order. This is not posted yet, I believe that this will contain an instruction: the case is remanded to USCIS for adjudication. At least this is what the note accompanying the filing in your docket sounds. So let's wait till we see this opinion & order before we continue the collective brainstorming what to do next.

Unfortunately there were several lawsuits when the judge remanded the the case to USCIS, with the instruction to adjudicate the case after the background check is complete. Like USCIS would sit on the application after this is done and they need to be told to do so. (Probably there are examples for this too, but I don't think that is typical. Most of these cases are stuck because the name check is not complete).

The other strange thing in your case that you still have your motion for summary judgement what was not opposed by defendant and the judge acted completely ignoring it. In my opinion, that also has to be considered, it is possible that the judge didn't even see it, considering the enter date in the docket of that motion. I'm really curious to see if the judge will rule on that motion and what will be the ruling.
 
Hi, Paz1960,
Thanks for the helps you ever did for me. I learned a lot from you and others here. Your good news is on the way I believe. We will share your celebrations soon!
 
Got a letter from the AUSA today, I think this is good news, but what exactly "REQUEST FOR A REMAND" means? I am the first case filled in the District of Northern Indiana, and the AUSA was very unhelpfull and refused to talk to me over the phone, however later I received a letter saying that he asked USCIS to ask FBI for expedite request and then I got a letter 5 weeks after I filed the case saying that my name check has cleared and "REQUEST FOR A REMAND". Also the judge has requested a phone conference for tomorrow, I think we will discuss the "Request for a remand", what should I ask, I am thinking I should bargain for 30 days extention and hopefully I will get my oath letter by then. Or should I agree with the request? Here is what the letter says:

FEDERAL DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR A REMAND

Come now Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney General, Michael Chertoff, Secretary
of the Department of Homeland Security, Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of United States Citizenship
and Immigration Services, and Robert S. Mueller, Director of Federal Bureau of Investigation
(hereinafter referred to as "Federal Defendants"), by their counsel, Joseph S. Van Bokkelen, United
States Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana, and ask this Court to remand this Petition for
Hearing on Naturalization Application for adjudication. In support of this request, the Federal
Defendants report the following:

1. Following the filing of this petition, the undersigned, working through appropriate agency
contacts, asked that the FBI expedite the completion of Petitioner's background examination;

2. The FBI has completed the background examination and has forwarded the results to CIS
for action. (Declaration of Michael A. Cannon, paragraphs 21 and 22)

3. CIS has notified the undersigned that Petitioner's "case has been granted and [CIS] is
trying to get him scheduled for final hearing."

4. Depending on how quickly arrangements can be made, Petitioner's naturalization will
either be done through the Court or administratively (if a name change is requested).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Moon_g said:
This morning, I just received emails from USCIS: my and my whole family's I-485 were approved. You know, I have been stuck in Name Check black hole for more than 32 months, and it took 57 days only to get everything done after I filed the WOM. Huge Release!! And I am sooooooo happy to see my 4-year Green Card journey came to the end.
Here I have to say Big Thanks to all the folks who shared their experience in this thread. especially, Delightfish, Paz1960, Junhuaw etc. Also I need to appreciate my AUSA, Ms. McNuty, Sheila. She is very nice AUSA always keeping me confident and encouraged.
Good luck to all of you filers and very very appreciate for contributing to this wonderful forum!!

moon_g
EB2
I140 RD: 09/18/2003
I140 AD: 3/03/2004
I485 RD: 4/01/2004
WOM filed in Northern District off Illinois (Chicago): 10/24/2006
Name Check: Cleared 12/13/2006
Last FP: 12/19/2006
I485 approved: 12/21/2006 morning :D
Click to expand...

Congratulation! At least, we have some good news before Christmas
 
second FP notice

I just got today's mail and guess what? A letter from USCIS, with the second FP notice, for Dec. 26 (the date when AUSA's answer or motion is due). Corroborating this with the info received from my AUSA (posted couple of days ago), I think that things really begun to move now. I still didn't see AUSA's motion to extend, what he mentioned in his e-mail.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Paz1960, it looks like things are starting to move for you, this is good news! They are finally doing their job!



paz1960 said:
I just got today's mail and guess what? A letter from USCIS, with the second FP notice, for Dec. 26 (the date when AUSA's answer or motion is due). Corroborating this with the info received from my AUSA (posted couple of days ago), I think that things really bgun to move now. I still didn't see AUSA's motion to extend, what he mentioned in his e-mail.
Click to expand...
 
You should look at this as a good news, your case is very strong now.




Comfused said:
Angry! Angry! Angry!
Today, My attorney who filed my I485 application called me emergently and faxed a notice from USCIS. Basically, they want me to do a second finger print and assigned a new A# to me because they mistakely assigned a A# used by another person. Then they kind of ordered me to have another finger print on 12/27/2006. If I missed it, my application will be abondoned (retaliation of my WOM). It is Christmas, I will definitely miss it if I am in vacation somewhere. Now I know why I get a motion to dismiss to my case so early. Because they definitely can not finish to adjudicate my application in a time schedule. They need to do another name check based on my new A # even my old name check is still pending based on the old A #. I could not imagine what other shocking mistakes will happen following my new A#. Barstards!

If I didn't file WOM, my name check will be pending forever because of the mistake. This is the second mistake that they had. The first one is that they secretly "administratively close" my case on May, 2006 without any notice until I find out through INFO pass before I filed WOM.

Now I am preparing my "opposition to motion to dismiss". I really want to let the Court know all these mistakes (I had their written letters for admitting these mistakes) found after I filed WOM. I haven't found a good way to do it. Any suggestion?. Amend my previous WOM or just written inside the opposition?

I just want to say that there is no way for us to uncover their illegal actions and scandals unless we put them in the court. Hope the system is really working and we can find our justice and let them pay all these damages. More people fight, more chances we will have our justice.
Click to expand...
 
stoyan79 said:
Got a letter from the AUSA today, I think this is good news, but what exactly "REQUEST FOR A REMAND" means? I am the first case filled in the District of Northern Indiana, and the AUSA was very unhelpfull and refused to talk to me over the phone, however later I received a letter saying that he asked USCIS to ask FBI for expedite request and then I got a letter 5 weeks after I filed the case saying that my name check has cleared and "REQUEST FOR A REMAND". Also the judge has requested a phone conference for tomorrow, I think we will discuss the "Request for a remand", what should I ask, I am thinking I should bargain for 30 days extention and hopefully I will get my oath letter by then. Or should I agree with the request? Here is what the letter says:

FEDERAL DEFENDANTS' REQUEST FOR A REMAND

Come now Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney General, Michael Chertoff, Secretary
of the Department of Homeland Security, Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of United States Citizenship
and Immigration Services, and Robert S. Mueller, Director of Federal Bureau of Investigation
(hereinafter referred to as "Federal Defendants"), by their counsel, Joseph S. Van Bokkelen, United
States Attorney for the Northern District of Indiana, and ask this Court to remand this Petition for
Hearing on Naturalization Application for adjudication. In support of this request, the Federal
Defendants report the following:

1. Following the filing of this petition, the undersigned, working through appropriate agency
contacts, asked that the FBI expedite the completion of Petitioner's background examination;

2. The FBI has completed the background examination and has forwarded the results to CIS
for action. (Declaration of Michael A. Cannon, paragraphs 21 and 22)

3. CIS has notified the undersigned that Petitioner's "case has been granted and [CIS] is
trying to get him scheduled for final hearing."

4. Depending on how quickly arrangements can be made, Petitioner's naturalization will
either be done through the Court or administratively (if a name change is requested).
Click to expand...
Looks to me that your case is practically approved. I saw couple of cases when the applicant was called for a second interview just to verify that the info they have on file, is correct. Because under 3. AUSA wrote that "Petitioner's case has been granted", I think that this can be the reason in your case, why this final hearing.

If they take seriously the statue, USCIS lost jurisdiction as soon you filed your lawsuit, and because of this, they can't act on your application. So, in my opinion, remand is the only logical step at this stage. But try really hard tomorrow to bargain for a specific timetable in the remand order, i.e., ask the defendants to agree and the judge to order in his remand the time limit that USCIS should adjudicate your case and in the case of approval, they should issue an oath letter as soon as possible but not later than 30 days after the date of the Remand Order. I believe that this can be relatively easy because they have your background check result and they already granted your application.

Show them (and mainly to the judge) that you are willing to compromise, i.e., agree with the remand, but let them know that you need a firm assurance (the judge instruction) that your case will be solved in a finite, well defined timeframe. Let us know tomorrow how the conference went. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Paz1960, I don't know how to thank you for all the help you have given me! I will keep you all updated after the conference tomorrow. I hope my case will help all other similar cases that will be filled in Northern District of Indiana as my case is the first one.



paz1960 said:
Looks to me that your case is practically approved. I saw couple of cases when the applicant was called for a second interview just to verify that the info they have on file, is correct. Because under 3. AUSA wrote that "Petitioner's case has been granted", I think that this can be the reason in your case, why this final hearing.

If they take seriously the statue, USCIS lost jurisdiction as soon you filed your lawsuit, and because of this, they can't act on your application. So, in my opinion, remand is the only logical step at this stage. But try really hard tomorrow to bargain for a specific timetable in the remand order, i.e., ask the defendants to agree and the judge to order in his remand the time limit that USCIS should adjudicate your case and in the case of approval, they should issue an oath letter as soon as possible but not later than 30 days after the date of the Remand Order. I believe that this can be relatively easy because they have your background check result and they already granted your application.

Show them (and mainly to the judge) that you are willing to compromise, i.e., agree with the remand, but let them know that you need a firm assurance (the judge instruction) that your case will be solved in a finite, well defined timeframe. Let us know tomorrow how the conference went. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.
Click to expand...
 
Moon_g said:
This morning, I just received emails from USCIS: my and my whole family's I-485 were approved. You know, I have been stuck in Name Check black hole for more than 32 months, and it took 57 days only to get everything done after I filed the WOM. Huge Release!! And I am sooooooo happy to see my 4-year Green Card journey came to the end.
Here I have to say Big Thanks to all the folks who shared their experience in this thread. especially, Delightfish, Paz1960, Junhuaw etc. Also I need to appreciate my AUSA, Ms. McNuty, Sheila. She is very nice AUSA always keeping me confident and encouraged.
Good luck to all of you filers and very very appreciate for contributing to this wonderful forum!!

moon_g
EB2
I140 RD: 09/18/2003
I140 AD: 3/03/2004
I485 RD: 4/01/2004
WOM filed in Northern District off Illinois (Chicago): 10/24/2006
Name Check: Cleared 12/13/2006
Last FP: 12/19/2006
I485 approved: 12/21/2006 morning :D
Click to expand...

Hello Moon_g,
Congratulation. You defenitely had a long wait. I waited for 26 months before filing my WOM on 11/22/2006. Your success gives me hope. Can you illustrate further on you case.Please share any pearls, sequence of events after filing and also the attitude of your AUSA. I shall appreciate that.

I-485 stuck in name check since Oct 4, 2004
Filed WOM 11/22/2006
Defendents in D.C served summons 11/29/2006
USA served on 12/1/2006
Proof of service filed 12/17/2006
 
I think this is it

It looks to me that my judge will waste no more time, my case is terminated according to pacer.
I called ACLU today, tehy said that if my case went on law west, or westlaw? it will be a precedent, they agreed that it is in everybody's interest to consider an appeal. However, the appeal is a very hard thing that I can't handle on my own, there are no immigration portals for appeals, and I can't afford ten of thousands of dollars for an appeal lawyer. I also looked at pacer for appeal cases, and you can only see the doccket history, they don't allow you to download the actual cases.
So, now that the reality is sinking in, I am in trouble either way, if my case got adjudicated, I might become a second Danilov, if it didn't I am screwed, so, there, life is hard.
Paz, you are teh brains here, have you seen an appeal sample somewhere online? I don't know what to do.

paz1960 said:
Normally, after this judgement, the judge writes an opinion & order. This is not posted yet, I believe that this will contain an instruction: the case is remanded to USCIS for adjudication. At least this is what the note accompanying the filing in your docket sounds. So let's wait till we see this opinion & order before we continue the collective brainstorming what to do next.

Unfortunately there were several lawsuits when the judge remanded the the case to USCIS, with the instruction to adjudicate the case after the background check is complete. Like USCIS would sit on the application after this is done and they need to be told to do so. (Probably there are examples for this too, but I don't think that is typical. Most of these cases are stuck because the name check is not complete).

The other strange thing in your case that you still have your motion for summary judgement what was not opposed by defendant and the judge acted completely ignoring it. In my opinion, that also has to be considered, it is possible that the judge didn't even see it, considering the enter date in the docket of that motion. I'm really curious to see if the judge will rule on that motion and what will be the ruling.
Click to expand...
 
sfdurrani said:
Hello Moon_g,
Congratulation. You defenitely had a long wait. I waited for 26 months before filing my WOM on 11/22/2006. Your success gives me hope. Can you illustrate further on you case.Please share any pearls, sequence of events after filing and also the attitude of your AUSA. I shall appreciate that.

I-485 stuck in name check since Oct 4, 2004
Filed WOM 11/22/2006
Defendents in D.C served summons 11/29/2006
USA served on 12/1/2006
Proof of service filed 12/17/2006
Click to expand...

Hi,
In WOM, a good AUSA is very important I believe. Because she is the real person to work with you. After one week of the filing, I went to the office of AUSA to ask who was assigned to my case and called to her. I was told that "your case will be resolved out of court", "Just wait". After that I emailed to my AUSA once a week to ask update about my case. She always encouraged me that " I am confident that your case will be resolved soon". She keep me posted for "Name Check Expediat", "Name Check Cleared in FBI" and "I485 Approval Notice was sent to you" Finally, in this morning, I got the approval notice from USCIS and in the afternoon, I got the copies of our Approval Notice and the Dismissal Notice from my AUSA. Also, I got Green Card ordered notice from USCIS in the evening.
Good luck! and I believe, you will get your Approval Notice soon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
coudn't find the AUSA

Hi guys, how did you find your AUSA?
It is wierd. I called the my district office, but was told that they couldn't find my case in their system, therefore couldn't locate the AUSA who is assigned to my case.
How long it takes normally to have this kind of case into their system? I gave the name my name and case no, but that didn't help?
Any thoughts?
 
btld123 said:
I think you should hire an experience lawyer to deal with this. You have a strong case to win now.
Good luck.
Click to expand...

I am trying to do this now. There are no many civil case or immigration lawyers who have experience about WOM for immigration in my area. It is not easy to find one. The reason that I didn't get a lawyer for my WOM case is that I don't have a good experience with the lawyer before. I may not have other choices for this stucked case unless find a lawyer. I put my finger crossed for finding a good one. Thank you for suggestions!
 
hayyyoot said:
It looks to me that my judge will waste no more time, my case is terminated according to pacer.
I called ACLU today, tehy said that if my case went on law west, or westlaw? it will be a precedent, they agreed that it is in everybody's interest to consider an appeal. However, the appeal is a very hard thing that I can't handle on my own, there are no immigration portals for appeals, and I can't afford ten of thousands of dollars for an appeal lawyer. I also looked at pacer for appeal cases, and you can only see the doccket history, they don't allow you to download the actual cases.
So, now that the reality is sinking in, I am in trouble either way, if my case got adjudicated, I might become a second Danilov, if it didn't I am screwed, so, there, life is hard.
Paz, you are teh brains here, have you seen an appeal sample somewhere online? I don't know what to do.
Click to expand...


I am not sure that your case can be use as a precedent. Here are the reasons Judge did not came out with Sumary judgement where he discussed the case and viewed the whole situation according to law and ruled based on factors he gathered. HE ONLY ORDERED WHAT WAS ASKED BY US ATTORNEY MOTION TO REMAND BACK.

We have to things in that Motion to remand.
1) USCIS is willing to adjudicate "may be" in 30 days.
2) USCIS lost jurisdiction so it needs it back before case can be move forward.

You can use above arguments both ways

First Judge ordered remand back to USCIS with out any timelines. (I believe USCIS will use this argument in future cases for defence)

Second Judge agreed with Motion to remand because it clearly stated estimated time USCIS is considering for adjudication. ( This is the argument Plaintiff's can use for opposing argument if USCIS cite this case in defence)

Clearly Judge did not entered any comments so we never know what was his decision purely based on so we have a lot of grey area that can be used both ways.

I agree this is not perfect Judgement that you should be looking for 1447b litigation but it is not as bad as Danilov.

In Danilov case Judge added his comments as how is ruled based on facts but in your case no comments from Judge he was ready for holidays and he did not bothered to make it precise and clear how he based his decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top