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

[zl2007]

Dear Publicus:

It's encouraging that most of the cases do not have to go the court. Unfortunately, it may not be in my case.

I was interviewed for citizenship on December 20, 2005. Of course, I heard no news from the USCIS ever since. I filed a lawsuit against USCIS and other agencies in Sept 2006, and served the summons. As the deadline for a response approaches, the US Atty requested an extension of the deadline by 30 days, which I agreed (the new deadline is January 26, 2007). I just spoke to the US Atty today, one week before the deadline. He urged me to dismiss the case because, according to him, there are thousands of people who got their naturalization interviews before me, who are still waiting for a clearing of the name check. I cannot be granted citizenship simply because I file a lawsuit. I told him that's not a good reason for me to dismiss the case and, if nothing happens by Jan 26, I'll bring the case to the court.

I have a perfectly clean record, a stable and well paid job, and a loving family. It's hard to imagine USCIS can win the case. But still, the US Atty did not push the CIS hard enough to have the case resolved before it goes to court, even if it is simply because of a pending name check. I guess I'm in the unfortunate 2%.

Do you have any advice as what I should do next? I suppose I should speak to the Judge's office and schedule a hearing if nothing happens before the deadline. If the US Atty brings up a motion for dismissal to the judge, what is the best response I can give? I can state the fact that, under INA 336(b) and 8USC 1447(b), I'm entitled to a hearing at a District Court. I can also point out that, according to the law, once a civil case is filed at a District Court, the USCIS loses jurisdiction over the application, and the jurisdiction goes to the Court (do you know the status code here?). What else should I do?

Any advice will be highly appreciated.

Z.

 

[paz1960]

Hallo Paz,

The return receipt indicates that Mr. Paul Perez, the United States District Attorney (United States District Court, District of Middle Florida) received the summons on November 14, 2006. I actually went to his office and asked the clerk there how he would like to be served. The reply was by certified mail.
However, I am still amazed that the clerks office of the U.S. District Court can't give you that info. By the way, shouldn't it be U.S. District Attorney instead of US Attorney for the District. At least that's what's on his carpet in the US Court House.

Thanks again

D.

It seems that you are still mixing the US Attorney and the US District Court. The US Attorneys are under the Department of Justice, their boss is Alberto Gonzales, the US Attorney General, who is like a ministry of justice in other countries, i.e., he is part of the Cabinet, so they are part of the Executive branch. Please see at http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/index.html. For your district, please see at http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/flm/

The US District Courts are part of the judiciary branch. The third branch of power is the legislative branch: the US Congress. For the federal judiciary system please see at: http://www.uscourts.gov/

 

[Saarlaender]

It seems that you are still mixing the US Attorney and the US District Court. The US Attorneys are under the Department of Justice, their boss is Alberto Gonzales, the US Attorney General, who is like a ministry of justice in other countries, i.e., he is part of the Cabinet, so they are part of the Executive branch. Please see at http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/index.html. For your district, please see at http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/flm/

The US District Courts are part of the judiciary branch. The third branch of power is the legislative branch: the US Congress. For the federal judiciary system please see at: http://www.uscourts.gov/

Dear Paz,

Ok, now I got it. It is the AUSA for the District. Well, at least I served the right person even though the title might be incorrect. So it would be the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida and the case is handled by U.S. District Court, District of Middle Florida. Did I finally get it right?

Best

D.

 

[DUDE12190]

Thanks. The file is in California. I was told the file will not be moved to another office until the name check result comes back. I have been contacting California office about the status on a regular basis since the move.

I guess Paz is right that if you ahve lived in the Texas for certain months. you can file 1447b since this law does not require that you fil has to be in the same district where u live. I would, however, doublecheck with a ggod lawyer before filing a lawsuit. And did you file AR-11 and send it to the address that is on that form. Also, you were supposed to call the 800 number and they should have sent you 2 notices. one in your old address and one in your new address. I am saying this because I moved in September within my state(not to another state), and I did both of these things. I got two letters from them, which I have saved for the proof. If you have not called the 800 number, do it immediately and also do the AR-11 because it is requirment by the law and most importantly, if you are gonna sue them, judje may ask you about those letters in the court. hope it is helpful. good luck again!!

 

[paz1960]

Dear Paz,

Ok, now I got it. It is the AUSA for the District. Well, at least I served the right person even though the title might be incorrect. So it would be the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida and the case is handled by U.S. District Court, District of Middle Florida. Did I finally get it right?

Best

D.

Dear Saarlaender,
Yes, it is right now. I really didn't want to pick on you so my apologies if this sounded like I did. The bottom line is that you sent your complaint and summons to the right place and you should call them to find out who was assigned to your case. As soon as you manage to contact AUSA, you can ask him/her why (s)he didn't file anything and tell him/her that you are going to file a motion for default judgement if (s)he is not willing to file something. Well, first try to be peaceful and friendly. It is still your interest to not create an enemy.

 

[hayyyoot]

Oath Ceromony Experince

(For my timeframe, see my earlier post on page 534)
After my late night flight last night, I arrived the court promptly at 8:30am, the ceromony was small today, so, it was held in a court room instead of the jurry assembly room where it is usually held. I arrived groutchy, and sleep deprived, and not really willing to have fun, just wanted my damn naturalization certificate.
The lady (Pamella) who called me from the CIS yesterday was in charge of the arrangements, there was a line up, where we handed out out green cards, and the filled out form N-445, they didn't even look at the form, I checked yes to leaving the country, they didn't ask where or when.
Then we all sat down, the naturalization applicants on one side, and their friends and family on the other side, Pamella started coaching us what to do as if we were kindergarten pupils, like, stand up when the (honorable) judge walks in, state your name and nationality ...etc, then, she asked for two volunteers to talk, one guy came with military uniform, so, she talked him into doing the speech on behalf of everybody, another lady volunteered.
The judge made a speech, somebody sang the national anthem, and there was a 5th graders class attending today as part of their civics class, the whole thing took about 2 hours and a half, honestly, boring long two hours and a half, after that, as we left the court room, we were handed our certificate of naturalization.
On the way out, there was a booth for voters registration, I went there, and asked a simple question: "what are the rules in Nevada? if I registered as an independent, can I still vote in the Democratic primaries??" I asked the old hag who was sitting there, and she said: if you want to vote for the democratic primaries, you need to be registered as a democrat, but I think that you are uncertain of that, so, you should register as an independet untill you decide what is best for you, I checked the box for democrat, and told her not to worry, I am certain of who I want to vote for, so, the old rude hag said: "you don't know what you are doing, those people make all of us pay taxes" I told the rude ugly hag: "can't you see? I am a minority, I don't mind paying taxes in order to maintain my civil rights" she became really angry, and said: "you are misinformed, very misinformed, you want all of us to pay taxes, you don't understand what are you getting yourself into" in a loud tone of voice. I was really pissed off, the voter registrar should be more neutral, so, after coming home, I called the office of Senator Harry Reed (senate majority leader from Nevada) and informed his staff about this VOTER INTIMIDATION incident.
Right after leaving the court, I went to the main post office, and applied for a passport, I paid the extra fee for expedited processing, they said that it is guaranteed 2 weeks processing, my experience has created a pesimist out of me, so, I don't know how long the passport will really take.
Well, I think that this ugly experience is behind me now, I wish everybody here the best, you are all troopers, standing up for yourself feels great, if you didn't get what you wanted, you have the satisfaction of knowing that you tried.
Please don't give up.

 

[paz1960]

Dear Publicus:

It's encouraging that most of the cases do not have to go the court. Unfortunately, it may not be in my case.

I was interviewed for citizenship on December 20, 2005. Of course, I heard no news from the USCIS ever since. I filed a lawsuit against USCIS and other agencies in Sept 2006, and served the summons. As the deadline for a response approaches, the US Atty requested an extension of the deadline by 30 days, which I agreed (the new deadline is January 26, 2007). I just spoke to the US Atty today, one week before the deadline. He urged me to dismiss the case because, according to him, there are thousands of people who got their naturalization interviews before me, who are still waiting for a clearing of the name check. I cannot be granted citizenship simply because I file a lawsuit. I told him that's not a good reason for me to dismiss the case and, if nothing happens by Jan 26, I'll bring the case to the court.

I have a perfectly clean record, a stable and well paid job, and a loving family. It's hard to imagine USCIS can win the case. But still, the US Atty did not push the CIS hard enough to have the case resolved before it goes to court, even if it is simply because of a pending name check. I guess I'm in the unfortunate 2%.

Do you have any advice as what I should do next? I suppose I should speak to the Judge's office and schedule a hearing if nothing happens before the deadline. If the US Atty brings up a motion for dismissal to the judge, what is the best response I can give? I can state the fact that, under INA 336(b) and 8USC 1447(b), I'm entitled to a hearing at a District Court. I can also point out that, according to the law, once a civil case is filed at a District Court, the USCIS loses jurisdiction over the application, and the jurisdiction goes to the Court (do you know the status code here?). What else should I do?

Any advice will be highly appreciated.

Z.

Hello zl2007 and welcome to this forum. Although I'm not Publicus - he is not active anymore on this forum - but we all owe him a big "Thank you" and have the moral obligation to try to help the newcomers on this journey, which means sueing the federal government.

First of all, don't let AUSA to intimidate you. Seems to me that he is not one of the nice persons who have compassion and try to help. But you should respect him and yourself, so stay calm and professional and of course, firm on your ground. The law is on your side and with perseverence, preparation and a little luck you will prevail.

Be assured that AUSA will file something by the deadline. It is very rare (although not unheard) that AUSA files nothing by the deadline.
This can be:
1. the Answer to your complaint (in that case you don't have to file any document, the next move will come from the judge)
2. Another motion to extend. Because there was already one, the judge will be less eager to grant it, although it will greatly depend on what cause will be listed for the extension
3. AUSA will file a Motion to dismiss or remand

In this case they invariantly argue that the name check is part of the examination, which is not a single event, but rather a process, so the 120 days clock from 1447(b) didn't even start (this is based on Danilov v. Aguirre, an early victory for the Government in the Easter District of Virginia). If they prevail, the court has no subject matter jurisdiction so your case would be dismissed. This means that your first goal will be to convince the judge that examination is not a process, it is a well defined event which happened when USCIS interviewed you and that was far more than 120 days ago.

If you are successful with this, there is the other part of the motion: remand. 1447(b) leaves at the judge's discretion to either conduct a hearing and decide the matter or to remand the matter to the Service with appropriate instructions. There is very little chance that the judge will opt for the first choice. The reason for this is that no judge in this country will naturalize you without the completed full criminal background check, which contains (according to USCIS), among others, the name check, which is missing for almost all of the members of this forum. AUSA was right when he told you that there are literally many thousands of applicants with the name check pending. You still can try to argue against the remand and ask the judge that this name check should be produced during the discovery phase of the lawsuit and have a hearing to decide the matter.

Most likely the judge will simply decide the motion without a hearing and order a remand. And here comes, in my opinion, the most critical part of the whole lawsuit: to convince the judge to include in the remand order a well defined timetable. Without this, you will be back to square one, i.e., exactly where you were before your lawsuit.

If AUSA files an answer, the judge most likely will order an initial case management conference and ultimately it will be a hearing on your case.

As a general recommendation: you need to study a lot in order to be prepared to defend your case. The best place to start is the beginning of this forum. Try to read as much as you can (I read every single post, you just need lot of time and lot of patience). Take notes, save the useful info and cases posted as attachements.

Make a PACER subscription and study similar cases first in your district and after that in other jurisdictions.

Read the HANDBOOK FOR LITIGANTS WITHOUT A LAWYER - UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (you can download it from their website. Even if you are in a different district, you can learn a ton from this well written document).

Read you court's Local Rules.

Ask questions on this forum. We are here to help each other. And good luck!

 

[paz1960]

My citizenship was scheduled, then descheduled, then rescheduled. Although I passed the interview examination in Sept. 2006, my name check is pending. Since the name check started around April 2006 based on what I was told during a recent INFOPASS, and since 99% of checks are finished within 6 months, I wonder if I should file another N400 just to see if it can make something happen, or I should file a 1447b pro se.

If I file a 1447b, I don't know how to convince the judge if she/he asks me why my case should be expedited when tens of thousands have waited for years. I understand the law is on my side, but from what I read, some 1447b cases are denied because of this counter argument.

Hello whatsnamecheck, welcome to this forum.
If we assume that putting somebody on hold with the name check is not a random act of nature or of a computer, there must be a reason why your name was not cleared in the first round. Unless they change the computer program or the data base on which they run the name check, no matter how many N-400 applications you file, your name check will be always put on hold. So I don't believe that filing a second N-400 application would help.

If you don't know how to convince the judge why your case should be expedited, you are not ready to file such a lawsuit Pro Se. If we believe the recent reports that USCIS will not ask automatically for an expedited processing of the name check at FBI, as soon as a lawsuit is filed, Plaintiffs should be prepared to be able to defend vigurously their cases either Opposing a motion to dismiss or remand or during a hearing in front of the judge.

But you are in the right place, there is plenty of information posted on this forum, you "just" need lot of time and patience. See my previous post what I recommended to an another newcomer. Good luck!

 

[lovingusa]

This is helpful

If nobody posted it before, I think its very helpful

http://www.ailf.org/lac/natz_delay0806.shtml

 

[paz1960]

I am aware the laws (INA 336, 8 USC 1447) are on our side, but I'd like to brainstorm with others in this forum about various questions a judge could throw at us. Every time I went to an INFOPASS, I was told there are tens of thousands of people waiting in front of you. But there are also lots of people who filed later than I did and got their citizenship already. When you get a speeding ticket, you cannot argue that there are lots of drivers who drive faster than you. However, I am not sure how to put these layman terms in a courtroom.

The reason for another N400 is that I don't know how name check works. I put my nickname on the first N400. I use an English nickname at work because my official firstname is difficult to pronounce, but I never use it on any governmental document. Does that mean there will be another round of name check if you have an alias? My lawyer wasn't helpful at all when he prepared for my N400. That's why I want to do the 1447b myself.

I think that you already found a very good reason why your name check is pending. If you used different name what you have used in other documents, you bet that they will raise a red flag and put a hold on your name check. Unfortunately, I have no good answer to the question how to correct this mistake. Maybe in this case it would be indeed a good idea to withdraw your first N-400 application and submit a new one using the name what you have in your official documents. Before you don't correct this, I don't believe that you have a chance to clear the name check. Without the name check you will not become a citizen. This is not only my belief, this is the law.

 

[pearlgal]

same person!

yes she is my friend's ausa. so far i know there's 2 person in our district, either my ausa edward olsen or yours. you can ask your congressman to check whether there's any expidate request has been sent, i was told by another forumer that he did that way and get back from congress his case was expedite juse several days before 12/22... so it worth to try...

take care, my friend, hope you the best!

pearl

Her name (AUSA) is Ila Deiss in San Francisco. She told me that no expedite name check.. so you see how differently they response to each one of us, although I am short 7 month to 2.5 years mark.

 

[Saarlaender]

Response of Congressman (FBI Name Check)

Dear Saarlaender,
Yes, it is right now. I really didn't want to pick on you so my apologies if this sounded like I did. The bottom line is that you sent your complaint and summons to the right place and you should call them to find out who was assigned to your case. As soon as you manage to contact AUSA, you can ask him/her why (s)he didn't file anything and tell him/her that you are going to file a motion for default judgement if (s)he is not willing to file something. Well, first try to be peaceful and friendly. It is still your interest to not create an enemy.

Dear Paz,

no thanks I believe it is important to get it right. At least I filed it with the right person. I talked to their office yesterday and they were very nice. Unfortunately, it was after 5 PM so the person still in the office could not find the docket but gave me the voicemail of the person responsible.
In the meantime I got a reply (yesterday) from my representative which reads as follows:

Dear....

In reply to my inquiry, Mr. Michael Cannon, Section Chief, National Name Check program Section, FBI, confirms that the name check requested by Citizenship and Immigration Services is still pending.
Mr. Cannon also advises that it sometimes becomes necessary to check paper records which can significantly delay processing and explains, "The FBI is sensitive to the impact of the delays in processing name check requests. At the same time, the consequences of the FBI's mission on homeland security require that our name check process be primarily focused on an accurate and thorough result. While an exact date for the completion of this review cannot be given, please be assured that the results will be made available to the immigration authorities as quickly as possible [...]"
Enclosed was the FBI's FAQ handout on Name Checks.

1. Is this usually the standard answer a Member of Congress gets when requesting information on a pending case or does this say that in my particular case they are going to scramble through paper work?
2. I had a DUI arrrest (cleared of charges later in court) in 2004. I know that this information is going to be a hit on the FBI name check. Another agency did a name check request some time ago and the arrest (not the verdict) showed up. Is this a possible "paper record"?
3. Do I see it right that it is basically the FBI which decides when it is going to provide the DHS-CSIS with the requested info and before that day, may that be whenever, there won't be any progress in my lawsuit?

Thanks again and sometimes I am really glad that I have a European passport!

Best

D.

 

[nat_01]

Distress situation

N400 application was filled in March, 2006 and FP in June, 2006. USCIS online status is processing June applications. Infopass and other inquiries was done and name is in pending check. Send mail to senators and congressman.

Don't know if one can file for 1447(b) for this situation? What will be the best way to resolve this situation as USCIS is not conducting interview before the name is cleared and one can wait for years to have an interview. Please advise!

Will appreciate your respose

Thanks

 

[paz1960]

Dear Paz,

no thanks I believe it is important to get it right. At least I filed it with the right person. I talked to their office yesterday and they were very nice. Unfortunately, it was after 5 PM so the person still in the office could not find the docket but gave me the voicemail of the person responsible.
In the meantime I got a reply (yesterday) from my representative which reads as follows:

Dear....

In reply to my inquiry, Mr. Michael Cannon, Section Chief, National Name Check program Section, FBI, confirms that the name check requested by Citizenship and Immigration Services is still pending.
Mr. Cannon also advises that it sometimes becomes necessary to check paper records which can significantly delay processing and explains, "The FBI is sensitive to the impact of the delays in processing name check requests. At the same time, the consequences of the FBI's mission on homeland security require that our name check process be primarily focused on an accurate and thorough result. While an exact date for the completion of this review cannot be given, please be assured that the results will be made available to the immigration authorities as quickly as possible [...]"
Enclosed was the FBI's FAQ handout on Name Checks.

1. Is this usually the standard answer a Member of Congress gets when requesting information on a pending case or does this say that in my particular case they are going to scramble through paper work?
2. I had a DUI arrrest (cleared of charges later in court) in 2004. I know that this information is going to be a hit on the FBI name check. Another agency did a name check request some time ago and the arrest (not the verdict) showed up. Is this a possible "paper record"?
3. Do I see it right that it is basically the FBI which decides when it is going to provide the DHS-CSIS with the requested info and before that day, may that be whenever, there won't be any progress in my lawsuit?

Thanks again and sometimes I am really glad that I have a European passport!

Best

D.

1. Yes, this is absolutely the standard, canned version of the answer they give to an inquiry about the status of the pending name check. And nothing unreasonable either, because this is how the name check process is working. They run your name against the "main" and "reference" file system, initially an automated process done by a computer program. If something comes up, they have to remove the name from the automated processing batch and somebody, a live person has to do additional check on the name flagged with a "hit". This involves many times recovery of paper files stored not necessary at the FBI HQ. But I believe, that the main reason for the delay is not that they are actively working months/years on a case; the case with a positive "hit" just sits somewhere in a pile and the FBI being undrestaffed and overflooded with a lot of name checks, they simply didn't reach your case to process it. This should not imply that I want to find an excuse for their unexcusable delay. If they think that this name check is so important but there is also a law which mandates the adjudication in 120 days after the interview, they should fix their broken system either automating more the whole process or hiring more agents to do the job timely. But everybody knows this (and still not able or not willing to fix the problem).
2. Did you request a FOIPA from FBI? If you had an arrest, most likely that there is a "main" file under your name, this should show up in a FOIPA research of the records. I believe that this may be a reason why your name check is pending. But the whole process (mainly the "reference" file system search) is totally lacking public transparence so it may be easily possible that you will never find out what caused the "hit" during your name check. It is very disturbing that the government stores info about people and they even don't tell you what is that possible derogatory thing about you. Most of the members on this forum requested FOIPA from FBI, that came back with "no record" but it is still obvious that they have something else what they don't tell you, otherways why the name check got stuck?
3. No this is not necessary true. The judge can order FBI to complete the name check in XX days after the order and order USCIS to adjudicate your application in YY days after they receive the results of the name check. The real goal of your lawsuit is to convince the judge for XX and YY some realistic numbers < indefinite/infinite.

 

[paz1960]

N400 application was filled in March, 2006 and FP in June, 2006. USCIS online status is processing June applications. Infopass and other inquiries was done and name is in pending check. Send mail to senators and congressman.

Don't know if one can file for 1447(b) for this situation? What will be the best way to resolve this situation as USCIS is not conducting interview before the name is cleared and one can wait for years to have an interview. Please advise!

Will appreciate your respose

Thanks

Unfortunately, you can't file a lawsuit based on 1447(b) if you dind't have your interview (well, technically, you can, of course, but it will be dismissed in no time)If you read the text of 1447(b), you should realise that why. Your only option will be to file a Writ of Mandamus lawsuit, in which you will need to demonstrate three things:

1. you have a clear right to the relief sought
2. the defendants have a clear, non-discretionary duty to act within reasonable period of time
3. no other remedy is available
See Nyaga v. Ashcroft, 323 F.3d 906, 911 (11th Cir. 2003)

Your biggest hurdle is to demonstrate that the amount of time you waited is unreasonable. From previous court decisions in immigration matters, seems that around 2 years is the time, when the judges begin considering the waiting time unreasonable.

 

[olegb]

Fp

Hello everyone,

A quick update on my case. I filed my petition at the end of October and recieved an answer from the US Attorney. And all my attempts to contact US Attorney who is handeling my case failed so far. Today, however, I recieved a letter from USCIS saying that in order for them to proceed with my case they need to fingerprint me since my first fingerprints were expired (were taked in September 2005). Here is my question. Is this a good sign or its a standard procedure to send letters out when fingerprints expired or are about to expire? What is your experience on that? Thank you guys in advance.

 

[icare]

You are very close

Hello everyone,

A quick update on my case. I filed my petition at the end of October and recieved an answer from the US Attorney. And all my attempts to contact US Attorney who is handeling my case failed so far. Today, however, I recieved a letter from USCIS saying that in order for them to proceed with my case they need to fingerprint me since my first fingerprints were expired (were taked in September 2005). Here is my question. Is this a good sign or its a standard procedure to send letters out when fingerprints expired or are about to expire? What is your experience on that? Thank you guys in advance.

Based on my experience, you are very close. I filed a WOM also in late October. On Dec 28th I got a FP notice (first FP is 2 years old) and I received the GC today.

Good luck to you.

icare

 

[some14all]

Case pending in court for a long time

hello everyone;
I need an advise on this. I filed my WOM last april 2006, after extensions granted by the judge to defendenats, they asked to dismiss the case sometime in August 2006. My filed my motion not to dismiss on Sept 10, 2006, and up to date, did not hear anything from the court. I have contacted the clerk several times, he said the case is still with the judge. Last week of December, I sent a written status check to the court to ping the judge, the judge replied noting my request and said we will let you know when the case is ruled in, really he did not tell a whole lot except that "Ok , we got your request". The judge was always so fast in replying as motions between me and the defendenats were exchanged. However, once I filed my last motion where the judge has to rule against one party over another, he is taking about 4 months now. I find that wierd, as if he is siding with them. I mean the reason I filed this case is because I am stuck in this background check forever and needed the court to put an end to it, now it seems the court is putting me in the limbo again. Any suggestions? is there a higher court I can seek to make this court rule?

 

[wenlock]

hello everyone;
I need an advise on this. I filed my WOM last april 2006, after extensions granted by the judge to defendenats, they asked to dismiss the case sometime in August 2006. My filed my motion not to dismiss on Sept 10, 2006, and up to date, did not hear anything from the court. I have contacted the clerk several times, he said the case is still with the judge. Last week of December, I sent a written status check to the court to ping the judge, the judge replied noting my request and said we will let you know when the case is ruled in, really he did not tell a whole lot except that "Ok , we got your request". The judge was always so fast in replying as motions between me and the defendenats were exchanged. However, once I filed my last motion where the judge has to rule against one party over another, he is taking about 4 months now. I find that wierd, as if he is siding with them. I mean the reason I filed this case is because I am stuck in this background check forever and needed the court to put an end to it, now it seems the court is putting me in the limbo again. Any suggestions? is there a higher court I can seek to make this court rule?

I have seen few cases like this but I think you can not do any thing other then wait for judge to rule. Are you prose or with attorney?

 

[kefira]

Hello everyone,

A quick update on my case. I filed my petition at the end of October and recieved an answer from the US Attorney. And all my attempts to contact US Attorney who is handeling my case failed so far. Today, however, I recieved a letter from USCIS saying that in order for them to proceed with my case they need to fingerprint me since my first fingerprints were expired (were taked in September 2005). Here is my question. Is this a good sign or its a standard procedure to send letters out when fingerprints expired or are about to expire? What is your experience on that? Thank you guys in advance.

Same happened to me. After I filed a case (end of Oct), 2 weeks later I received a letter to do a FP. Unfortunately the case is still open, although I know that FP were cleared.