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

koko8 said:
Hi, i have been following the Senate in debating the Bill 2611 and one of section states that they will amend particularly in Section 336(b) (8 U.S.C 1447(b) to be amended as follows:-

Request for hearing before disctirct court:-
Wherein if there is a failure to render a final administrative decision under Section 335 before the end of 180 days period begining on the date on which the Secretary of Homeland Security completes all examnination and interviews required under such section, the applicant may apply to the district court for the district in which the applicants resides for a hearing on the matter. Such district court shall only have jurisdiction to review the basis for delay and remand the matter, with appropriate instructions to the Secretary for the Secretary's determination on the application.

Note:-
The current legislation provides an avenue for the applicant to determine their matter in the district court but with the changes, applicant could only get thier matter heard in court on why they delay the matter but however, the judge are not allow to determine the case but to send back the case to USCIS. And this amendments shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

I hope anybody can correct me if my interpretation is right or are willing to share their views regarding this amendment and how it affect those who are still waiting for their naturalization application to be adjudicated due to name check problem.

Thanks
Click to expand...

If it passes, I don't think there will be a change in the outcome. Very few applicants, if any, have been naturalized by the judge in a 1447b case. Cases that have made it to trial have been remanded to USCIS with instructions to make a determination within xx number of days.

The wording of this law will not hurt applicants who face delays except that they have to wait an extra 60 days. In the law, 8 USC 1446 and relevant CFRs, examination refers to the interview. The current law allows a second examination, but the law also states that it must be done within 120 days of the first examination.

So an applicant will be able to file a petition within 180 days of their interview under the condition that USCIS does not call them back within 120 days, or they can petition 180 days after USCIS holds the second interview/examination.

Regarding the namecheck, several cases have distinguished between examination and investigation. The courts have repeatedly ruled that the namecheck is not part of the examination. This bill does not mention investigation.
 
koko8 said:
Hi, i have been following the Senate in debating the Bill 2611 and one of section states that they will amend particularly in Section 336(b) (8 U.S.C 1447(b) to be amended as follows:-

Request for hearing before disctirct court:-
Wherein if there is a failure to render a final administrative decision under Section 335 before the end of 180 days period begining on the date on which the Secretary of Homeland Security completes all examnination and interviews required under such section, ...
I hope anybody can correct me if my interpretation is right or are willing to share their views regarding this amendment and how it affect those who are still waiting for their naturalization application to be adjudicated due to name check problem.

Thanks
Click to expand...

I think the fact that one may sue only after ALL checks have been completed is very important, which is clearly stating that the clock starts ticking not upon initial interview as it is today. And 180 days is up from 120.

This would be very bad news if enacted, since applicants would effectively have NO recourse in case of name check delays. :mad:
 
Question

lt1GM said:
I think the fact that one may sue only after ALL checks have been completed is very important, which is clearly stating that the clock starts ticking not upon initial interview as it is today. And 180 days is up from 120.

This would be very bad news if enacted, since applicants would effectively have NO recourse in case of name check delays. :mad:
Click to expand...

Will this affect those who have filed petitions with the district court?
 
Eastbayer said:
Will this affect those who have filed petitions with the district court?
Click to expand...

Unless they make it somehow retroactive, no it won't affect.

When I spoken with AUSA, she mentioned that "soon they will get rid of the 120 day rule but it won't affect your case". So, if you have the case going already, there is nothing they can do. Of course she probably thought that at that point of time I'll begin to cry, promise to take my case back and never ever do something terrible like that again :)
 
Did anyone sue for not being given oath even after being told that petition was approved at the interview? How long should the wait be before suing?
 
hadenuf said:
Than you for responding. Is there any material(testimony or other material) that we can use to claim that FBI says that they can complete the name checks if CIS asks them to do so?.

In particular I am looking for the link where the FBI mentioned that they can expedite name chekcs when USCIS asks them do so
Click to expand...
 
koko8 said:
Hi, i have been following the Senate in debating the Bill 2611 and one of section states that they will amend particularly in Section 336(b) (8 U.S.C 1447(b) to be amended as follows:-

Request for hearing before disctirct court:-
Wherein if there is a failure to render a final administrative decision under Section 335 before the end of 180 days period begining on the date on which the Secretary of Homeland Security completes all examnination and interviews required under such section, the applicant may apply to the district court for the district in which the applicants resides for a hearing on the matter. Such district court shall only have jurisdiction to review the basis for delay and remand the matter, with appropriate instructions to the Secretary for the Secretary's determination on the application.

Note:-
The current legislation provides an avenue for the applicant to determine their matter in the district court but with the changes, applicant could only get thier matter heard in court on why they delay the matter but however, the judge are not allow to determine the case but to send back the case to USCIS. And this amendments shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

I hope anybody can correct me if my interpretation is right or are willing to share their views regarding this amendment and how it affect those who are still waiting for their naturalization application to be adjudicated due to name check problem.

Thanks
Click to expand...
 
hadenuf said:
Than you for responding. Is there any material(testimony or other material) that we can use to claim that FBI says that they can complete the name checks if CIS asks them to do so?.

In particular I am looking for the link where the FBI mentioned that they can expedite name chekcs when USCIS asks them do so
Click to expand...

ok, this is the testimony, or declaration of the fbi nam check section, cheif, it iscludeall thedetails
 
hi guys could some one plz help me. !!!

case details
140 eb2 PD: feb 02
485: aug 02 and case got transferred to nsc in 2003.
After a infopass trip i was told my NC got intiated 3 times, two times in 2002 for which they didnt get succesfull and required results and the third time they intiated it in 2003 my nc has been stuck since. I checked all the FOIPA records, the results was no records and no criminal history in my background.

guys is writ of mandamus good at this point or shall i wait out.

One other question i wanted to ask is, if u file WOM is ur case looked in to more deeply than other cases.
 
nscvictim said:
hi guys could some one plz help me. !!!

case details
140 eb2 PD: feb 02
485: aug 02 and case got transferred to nsc in 2003.
After a infopass trip i was told my NC got intiated 3 times, two times in 2002 for which they didnt get succesfull and required results and the third time they intiated it in 2003 my nc has been stuck since. I checked all the FOIPA records, the results was no records and no criminal history in my background.

guys is writ of mandamus good at this point or shall i wait out.

One other question i wanted to ask is, if u file WOM is ur case looked in to more deeply than other cases.
Click to expand...
the choice is yours, but i think you have waited enough, i have filed WOM , and my 485 was filed June 2003, so if you like wait more you can, but the truth since you get stuck, you will be stuck for a period no one how long, beside you never what new laws will be passed that might eliminate, or reduce the extent of jidicial review on USCIS, so my adice, and i think that is the advice of everyne ehre, is that if you dont file with th court, your case very ikely wil remain here it is
 
Mohamed

Mohamed,

It seems you did not receive my complete message in your private mail. Please check now I sent new one again just now.
 
to nscvictim and my case update

My lawyer always told me to wait, even after three years of waiting on name check. See what I'd got -- nothing. I've been patient, and tried different other means including playing the congresswoman card from 2004. Still nothing.The most recent response (5/1/2006) from the congresswoman's office was the same as those in the past two years: due of lack of manpower, my name check was delayed, and no idea till when. With the help of this thread, I filed WOM on March 10th, and yesterday, I received an email from USCIS website link, indicating that my case was approved.

My case summary:
140 eb2 PD: April 02
485 March 03t
FP Initiation date: 5/7/03
WOM: 3/10/2006 (pro se) in New Haven CT
485 approved on 5/18/2006

I am not posting often, but thought my little victory may add a little hope to those who are still waiting for the results. We shall all succeed in the end.

Thank everyone here for your help!


nscvictim said:
hi guys could some one plz help me. !!!

case details
140 eb2 PD: feb 02
485: aug 02 and case got transferred to nsc in 2003.
After a infopass trip i was told my NC got intiated 3 times, two times in 2002 for which they didnt get succesfull and required results and the third time they intiated it in 2003 my nc has been stuck since. I checked all the FOIPA records, the results was no records and no criminal history in my background.

guys is writ of mandamus good at this point or shall i wait out.

One other question i wanted to ask is, if u file WOM is ur case looked in to more deeply than other cases.
Click to expand...
:D :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi RealSuperk, could you do me a favor and send me a word format of just your reply to the answer. I'm in the same boat as you. Thanks
 
reallymad said:
Hi RealSuperk, could you do me a favor and send me a word format of just your reply to the answer. I'm in the same boat as you. Thanks
Click to expand...

No problem. Here it is.

Like your nick. Kinda describes how 99.9% of people in this thread feel.
 
mayseventh2003 said:
My lawyer always told me to wait, even after three years of waiting on name check. See what I'd got -- nothing. I've been patient, and tried different other means including playing the congresswoman card from 2004. Still nothing.The most recent response (5/1/2006) from the congresswoman's office was the same as those in the past two years: due of lack of manpower, my name check was delayed, and no idea till when. With the help of this thread, I filed WOM on March 10th, and yesterday, I received an email from USCIS website link, indicating that my case was approved.

My case summary:
140 eb2 PD: April 02
485 March 03t
FP Initiation date: 5/7/03
WOM: 3/10/2006 (pro se) in New Haven CT
485 approved on 5/18/2006

I am not posting often, but thought my little victory may add a little hope to those who are still waiting for the results. We shall all succeed in the end.

Thank everyone here for your help!



:D :D
Click to expand...

HA! You kicked their collective asses! Good job!

"Due of lack of manpower, my name check was delayed, and no idea till when" Pathetic. Can't they come up with a better argument? I mean, at least something along the lines of "the dog ate your name check" or "my little sister used your name check for drawing paper".

If all this is done in the name of national security, STOP SHIPPING MONEY TO IRAQ AND HIRE MORE PEOPLE TO TAKE CARE OF NATIONAL SECURITY!

Ok, I'm off my soap box. :D

K
 
guys is there major difference between prose vs WOM.

do we need lawyers for either or both to open a case and stick through it.

thanks a lot guys

i am gonna do it any day soon after 4 ead's i am going mentally insane.
 
nscvictim said:
guys is there major difference between prose vs WOM.

do we need lawyers for either or both to open a case and stick through it.

thanks a lot guys

i am gonna do it any day soon after 4 ead's i am going mentally insane.
Click to expand...

Pro se isn't a type of a lawsuit. "Pro se" means that you file the lawsuit yourself. You can file WOM "pro se" or with a lawyer.

You are probably mixing up 1447b and WOM. For adjustment of status you can only file WOM. 1447b is only good for citizenship applications.

Soooooooooooooo, to make a long story short, your choices are

1. File WOM Pro Se
2. File WOM with a lawyer.

I hope no matter how you file it, you kick their asses.

K
 
I Am A Us Citizen

I have made it, I have been naturalized yesterday and become a US citizen...Thank you everybody and good luck and God bless us all...and God bless America.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top