I remember that I read somewhere (probably here on this forum) that a case is considered published only when it appears in the Federal Suppliment. Strictly speaking, only published cases are considered legal precedents, but many of these cases are so recent that they were not published yet in the Fed. Supp. In my opinion, the most important thing is to have a correct citation (case number, party names, date and name of the district, eventually Westlaw or NEXIS number) so if the court or AUSA wants to look up the case, they can do that using the citation you provide. But things (especially in legal matters) are not always working based on common sense. There are rules and regulations, which sometimes thrumph the common sense.
Anyone with a lawsuit against USCIS or thinking about a lawsuit (Merged)
- Thread starter Publicus
- Start date
I remember that I read somewhere (probably here on this forum) that a case is considered published only when it appears in the Federal Suppliment. Strictly speaking, only published cases are considered legal precedents, but many of these cases are so recent that they were not published yet in the Fed. Supp. In my opinion, the most important thing is to have a correct citation (case number, party names, date and name of the district, eventually Westlaw or NEXIS number) so if the court or AUSA wants to look up the case, they can do that using the citation you provide. But things (especially in legal matters) are not always working based on common sense. There are rules and regulations, which sometimes thrumph the common sense.
My mistake
This Memo mentions again the 336(b):
"Naturalization adjudications are subject to a unique law, Section 336(b), of Immigration and Nationality Act. This law allows an applicant to bring law suit in Federal Court and allows the court to take over jurisdiction of the case if USCIS has not adjudicated the case within 120 days from when the examination was conducted." So here is what I found:
I wrote few days ago about the confusion of sec. 336(b) and what I found, in USC 336.9 and it was my mistake: the law suits and now this Memo mention Section 336(b) of INA. In my previous letter, I looked at 336.9 of USC. Both of these sections deal with "Applications denied by CIS" and USC 336.9 deals specifically with the denied naturalization applications and that's what caused my mistake-I thought it cannot apply to the delayed decision.
But 336(b) of INA does say:
"(b) If there is a failure to make a determination under section 335 before the end of the 120-day period after the date on which the examination is conducted under such section, the applicant may apply to the United States district court for the district in which the applicant resides for a hearing on the matter. Such court has jurisdiction over the matter and may either determine the matter or remand the matter, with appropriate instructions, to the Service to determine the matter."
So even though it still belongs to the chapter of naturalization denials, this subsection is the same as 1447(b) (and it even cross-refers to it).
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=baeb6daf5705c4f8629f8b6ea9f7c64d
This Memo mentions again the 336(b):
"Naturalization adjudications are subject to a unique law, Section 336(b), of Immigration and Nationality Act. This law allows an applicant to bring law suit in Federal Court and allows the court to take over jurisdiction of the case if USCIS has not adjudicated the case within 120 days from when the examination was conducted." So here is what I found:
I wrote few days ago about the confusion of sec. 336(b) and what I found, in USC 336.9 and it was my mistake: the law suits and now this Memo mention Section 336(b) of INA. In my previous letter, I looked at 336.9 of USC. Both of these sections deal with "Applications denied by CIS" and USC 336.9 deals specifically with the denied naturalization applications and that's what caused my mistake-I thought it cannot apply to the delayed decision.
But 336(b) of INA does say:
"(b) If there is a failure to make a determination under section 335 before the end of the 120-day period after the date on which the examination is conducted under such section, the applicant may apply to the United States district court for the district in which the applicant resides for a hearing on the matter. Such court has jurisdiction over the matter and may either determine the matter or remand the matter, with appropriate instructions, to the Service to determine the matter."
So even though it still belongs to the chapter of naturalization denials, this subsection is the same as 1447(b) (and it even cross-refers to it).
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=baeb6daf5705c4f8629f8b6ea9f7c64d
I feel your pain
pankajkandhari.
I have similar problem, as you can see
Also, I got tons of downloads so now it is hard to find the one I need among them.
Thanks Shivili for pointing this out.. I guess its time to read all the atachments I have and then sort them better... The thread with 630 pages, its hard to keep track of everything.. and I just started looking 2 weeks ago.. just skimmed through every page and saved the attachments for later..
Anyway, will be more careful next time..
pankajkandhari.
I have similar problem, as you can see
Also, I got tons of downloads so now it is hard to find the one I need among them.786riz,
I also remembered another helpful Memo posted earlier by other members, see the attachment.
Thank you for correction!
As I was preapring my initial complain for 1447b, I read your old thread and got very confused. Then when I just read this Memo second time, it became clear that you were on mistake. I think it is not bad at all to make mistakes since none of us is an expert lawyer, as long as we correct them. Thank you for doing that. Best of Luck, regards, dude
As I was preapring my initial complain for 1447b, I read your old thread and got very confused. Then when I just read this Memo second time, it became clear that you were on mistake. I think it is not bad at all to make mistakes since none of us is an expert lawyer, as long as we correct them. Thank you for doing that. Best of Luck, regards, dude
Hi Olin,
Thanks so much for your message. Congrats on your progress! I decided to ask for an extension of the deadline to respond to the MTD. The US attorney agreed with me on this request. I guess the Judge should okay the request. During this extension period, I will find ways to push USCIS to take an action on my application since the FBI name check was completed back to early Jan. If anyone has a good idea of how to ask USCIS to speed the application process once name check is done, pls let me know.
Also, I don't know if anyone knows how to get in touch with Vermont Service Center by phone, email, fax, or other channels. I will be meeting with the US attorney next week. Does anyone know an effective way to get any kind of support or sympathy from US attorney? I believe US attorneys are more efficient in pushing USCIS to take actions.
Good luck!
netrin
Thanks so much for your message. Congrats on your progress! I decided to ask for an extension of the deadline to respond to the MTD. The US attorney agreed with me on this request. I guess the Judge should okay the request. During this extension period, I will find ways to push USCIS to take an action on my application since the FBI name check was completed back to early Jan. If anyone has a good idea of how to ask USCIS to speed the application process once name check is done, pls let me know.
Also, I don't know if anyone knows how to get in touch with Vermont Service Center by phone, email, fax, or other channels. I will be meeting with the US attorney next week. Does anyone know an effective way to get any kind of support or sympathy from US attorney? I believe US attorneys are more efficient in pushing USCIS to take actions.
Good luck!
netrin
Got my MTD package in mail after work
It's 21 pages file. i have to take some time to read it carefully before i fight back. also has a declaration from the INS to show how they work hard on my case. They did put my NC on expedited after WOM, but 3 months passed, no result came back. According to local rule, i have 14 days to file my OPP to MTD, But my work is so busy, and i have to take care of my family. i can not finished my OPP in next 2 weeks. Can I ask the court or AUSA to allow me more time to file my OPP? Since AUSA can ask for extension, i think maybe i can ask for more time too, right? i will have one week vacation at the end of this month.
It's 21 pages file. i have to take some time to read it carefully before i fight back. also has a declaration from the INS to show how they work hard on my case. They did put my NC on expedited after WOM, but 3 months passed, no result came back. According to local rule, i have 14 days to file my OPP to MTD, But my work is so busy, and i have to take care of my family. i can not finished my OPP in next 2 weeks. Can I ask the court or AUSA to allow me more time to file my OPP? Since AUSA can ask for extension, i think maybe i can ask for more time too, right? i will have one week vacation at the end of this month.
Update on my case. March 1st, I had the first teleconf with the judge, AUSA asked for 4 months of extension and the judge recommend me to hire a lawyer. I will meet the lawyer next Wednesday. Today, I received an e-mail from this AUSA, "I am going to file a Motion to Dismiss your case. I am required to confer with you. I am moving to dismiss your case based on the court's lack of jurisdiction and the fact that you have to wait in line like everyone else. Do you object to the Motion to Dismiss? I am not allowed to give you legal advice. If you object, the Court will let you file a response.". Isn't this weird? I haven't reply the e-mail yet. Any suggestions? I think the lawyer is very necessary now.
It is getting very common now US attorneys are fighting back WOm cases. They get pressure from high above. My US attorney is very nice and professional and he indicated to me that USCIS general counsel recommends filling motions to dismiss due to increase in these law suits. He offered me if I want to fight or get another extension at this point as he has not heard any thing back from USCIS yet. I said we can go through another extension. At this point it looks like going through another extension is suitable as he said and I think I agree he can not do any thing more then just telling agencies that try to resolve quickly.
The problem is that I am not really sure if this new AUSA is trying to help at all. I don't know if my name check is indeed expedited or not. Too many unknowns.
You can ask AUSA about possible extension of time for responding to Motion to dismiss. If he agree just file motion for extension of time for responding to defendents motion to dismiss. If AUSA agrees to extention just make sure that you mention that defendents counsel do not have any objections for 30 day extensions
Create order template with your motion that Judge can order.
Hi Team,
Thank you so much for the memos, thses will be the part of my counter motion to dismiss.
I just wrote back to the AUSA to ask if she can just change that to an extension.
I am not sure what do you mean by change that to an extension.
Do you mean he changes his Motion to Dismiss to time extension? I do not think that he will do that if he already filed with court.
If you are asking him extension of time to respond to his motion to dismiss that should be fine. You can file Joint stipulation that both parties agree for response to motion to dismiss should be enlarge by another 30 days.
Dear All:
This is a rather trivial paperwork matter, but I still decided to share my experience filing the Proof of Service with San Jose court. Writing the list of addresses with ones signature like in the .doc and the .pdf attachments floating around this forum turned out to be excessive – the clerk needed only the copy of the first page of Complaint, but would file the list anyway if it had the first page of Complaint info with Case # on it. The court does not accept double-sided documents or copies, despite issuing ones – the summons in this case. I had to copy the back side of the filled summons. To summarize: one files 1. first page of Complaint, 2. filled original summon, 3. copy of the filled back side of the summon and 4. copy of the USPS tracking webpage printout with the USPS certified mail receipt. Items 2 through 4 – per each defendant + AUSA sorted appropriately. The original USPS receipts are not needed for filing but should be kept for one’s own records.
Little help from the clerk regarding the debated here “RETURN RECEIPTS REQUESTED”. She said – most people do request return receipts, but did not know what they do with those receipts. Suggested that if I needed any statistics as to what happened to those who did not request return receipts - I should collect info through PACER myself.
This info may or may not be applicable to your court – please check your local rules.
Best of luck!
snorlax
This is a rather trivial paperwork matter, but I still decided to share my experience filing the Proof of Service with San Jose court. Writing the list of addresses with ones signature like in the .doc and the .pdf attachments floating around this forum turned out to be excessive – the clerk needed only the copy of the first page of Complaint, but would file the list anyway if it had the first page of Complaint info with Case # on it. The court does not accept double-sided documents or copies, despite issuing ones – the summons in this case. I had to copy the back side of the filled summons. To summarize: one files 1. first page of Complaint, 2. filled original summon, 3. copy of the filled back side of the summon and 4. copy of the USPS tracking webpage printout with the USPS certified mail receipt. Items 2 through 4 – per each defendant + AUSA sorted appropriately. The original USPS receipts are not needed for filing but should be kept for one’s own records.
Little help from the clerk regarding the debated here “RETURN RECEIPTS REQUESTED”. She said – most people do request return receipts, but did not know what they do with those receipts. Suggested that if I needed any statistics as to what happened to those who did not request return receipts - I should collect info through PACER myself.
This info may or may not be applicable to your court – please check your local rules.
Best of luck!
snorlax
Last edited by a moderator:
james_gmail
Registered Users (C)
Hi, everyone, I just filed a suit on March 8. 2007.
I need your urgent help. I just found the clerk put my case in the category of "other civial rights" instead of "other statutary action". Can I contact the court to make the correction? Should I resend the summon in this case?
I need your urgent help. I just found the clerk put my case in the category of "other civial rights" instead of "other statutary action". Can I contact the court to make the correction? Should I resend the summon in this case?
BostonDude4
Registered Users (C)
Does anybody has an oath on March 28 in Boston?