Anyone with a lawsuit against USCIS or thinking about a lawsuit (Merged)
- Thread starter Publicus
- Start date
Bushmaster
Registered Users (C)
Dear friends, an important question was here the other day, an applicant asked, if filing a lawsuit and later winning it and obtaining US citizenship by this way would negatively affect your chances of getting government jobs, do you have any info on this?
I would be concerned, since I will be going through Department of Defense for clearance once the citizenship is obtained and there is no 1447 to move them quickly.
Pretty much I would hate to hear Uncle Sam saying "oh you sued me to get your citizenship, well no jobs for you from me"
I would be concerned, since I will be going through Department of Defense for clearance once the citizenship is obtained and there is no 1447 to move them quickly.
Pretty much I would hate to hear Uncle Sam saying "oh you sued me to get your citizenship, well no jobs for you from me"
I am almost sure that there is no such official policy. Even if they deny you later, they will not use this argument. It would certainly violate your rights; remember, they are not stupid.
How about the effective, practical things? I don't have any info about that and most likely any info about this would be just anecdotical.
hopeforall2
Registered Users (C)
You guys are unbelievable , Thanks paz / lazycis and all friends , your help and sharing is much appreciated , it elevates to one family spirit than friends feeling.
If I am right, the next step is , to wait for the judge to order a conference ( no need to answer to defendants response ) I greatfully learned that from paz.
The judge can not dismiss the case just because the defendants requested to do so.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thank you.
If I am right, the next step is , to wait for the judge to order a conference ( no need to answer to defendants response ) I greatfully learned that from paz.
The judge can not dismiss the case just because the defendants requested to do so.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thank you.
Unfortunately, it is not so simple. The judge practically can do whatever s/he wants in these cases. In most of these cases there is no factual dispute, it is a mere interpretation of the law. Because there is no higher level court decision precedent and the previous court decisions are divided (although, fortunately, more favorable decisions for the Plaintiffs) the outcome is unpredictable. The judge can rule solely based on the documents filed with the court, without an oral hearing. I saw cases when the judge didn't even wait for defendants' answer or motion, see 786riz's case.
Still, the most likely course of action, in my opinion, would be that the judge orders some sort of initial case management conference. At one point, AUSA will file a Motion to Dismiss, if your case is not solved by then. After that you will file an Opposition the Defendants Motion, they may file a Reply to your opposition. After that the judge euither will rule on the defendants motion without a hearing or will order a hearing. There can be a Motion for Summary Judgement, in that case you will need to file an opposition and probably a cross motion for summary judgement. The course of action can vary from district to district and judge to judge, inside the same district. The judges have a fairly large autonomy, of course they need to follow the FRCP, but this gives them enough flexibility that practically it is unpredictable how exactly your case will evolve.
Hey Paz,
I got this last week.
Defendants never mentioned before summary judgment in MTD.
So here do they move for summary judgment?
LINE RE FILING OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
On February 2007, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative for
Summary Judgment, and a Memorandum of law in support thereof. That motion presented several
issues that were similar to those raised in two recent decisions from other districts.
These two opinions further supports the arguments made in Defendant’s February 13, 2007
Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment in this case. Attached please find a copies of those
opinions for the Court’s reference
I got this last week.
Defendants never mentioned before summary judgment in MTD.
So here do they move for summary judgment?
LINE RE FILING OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY
On February 2007, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative for
Summary Judgment, and a Memorandum of law in support thereof. That motion presented several
issues that were similar to those raised in two recent decisions from other districts.
These two opinions further supports the arguments made in Defendant’s February 13, 2007
Motion to Dismiss or for Summary Judgment in this case. Attached please find a copies of those
opinions for the Court’s reference
If it is really true that they never mentioned in their previously filed papers "Motion for Summary Judgement", I believe that AUSA made a mistake. With the Motion for Summary Judgement I have mixed feelings.
The good part is that it is likely that the lawsuit will end faster and if the judge is on your side, you will have a favorable decision faster.
The bad part is that with the Motion for Summary Judgement Defendants want to avoid a hearing and discovery. The judge still can deny their motion and order a trial. It is really up to the judge. As I wrote before, the FRCP gives to the courts enough flexibility that the judge can go either way; i.e., decide the motions solely based on the documents filed or s/he can order a hearing.
I don't know which one is better (summary judgement or hearing). My guess that this depends from case to case, or more precisely from judge to judge.
hello, Paz:
I am fairly new to this forum, but everything I have been reading is very useful. Thank yuo and all the others for all the information.
I filed my lawsuit WOM 1/31/07. Got MTD today, which set a dealine for response and date for hearing before the Judge. I am trying to preparing a opposition to MTD. I have a question about how to write to the court to reset the date for the hearing, because I will have to go out of town for business trip. Do you or any one know how to write or point me a case where such file has been submitted?
thank you very much!
41906
I am fairly new to this forum, but everything I have been reading is very useful. Thank yuo and all the others for all the information.
I filed my lawsuit WOM 1/31/07. Got MTD today, which set a dealine for response and date for hearing before the Judge. I am trying to preparing a opposition to MTD. I have a question about how to write to the court to reset the date for the hearing, because I will have to go out of town for business trip. Do you or any one know how to write or point me a case where such file has been submitted?
thank you very much!
41906
Paz I know that you r an excellent resource to all of us here and I thankful to you. But I have to disagree with you now. My attorney said that waiting for MTD is just waste of time and Plaintiff should ask immediately for a cross motion judgment. Why it is good? Plaintiff won't loose at least 4 month as in my case. If I knew this back in January, then my case already would be closed, but... as always but.. I am not an attorney and mistakes are made. Also I am taking only about my personal experience and my personal situation AOS.
I believe you need to file a Supplemental Case Management Statement or a Joint Case Mgmt Statement & Order. You probably should ask your AUSA to agree to it, especially if you are using the second form. In my court the forms are here: http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/f...42212a64dea6d6aa88256d4a0058f20c?OpenDocument and here http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/f...2011633eaededba088256d4a0058f1ff?OpenDocument
Best of luck,
snorlax
I have to agree with kefira. In fact, you can combine opposition to MTD with your motion for summary judgment (or, to be exact, motion for judgment on the pleadings - Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure).
According to the rules, there should be a complaint and an answer (MTD in most cases), after that you can move for judgment on the pleadings. So if you want quick resolution, do that, or hire an attorney to write it for you.
However, you cannot move for judgment on the pleadings until you get an answer from the defendants (it could be just "answer" or MTD).
Paz is right, however, that judge can pretty much do whatever he/she wants, although you can always file a motion to reconsider and/or appeal. My vision is that the law is on our side so we should prevail at the end.
Overall, I strongly recommend hiring a lawyer if your case did not get resolved after a judge ruled on MTD. By that time you should see AUSA tactics (they either put pressure on USCIS to expedite your case or they just ignore you). You do not want to lose your case on a small technicality and you probably cannot afford to take a couple months vacation to pursue your case during discovery and trial phases. Sometimes your initial complaint needs to be amended to prevail.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kefira,
You say that because you live in district with best judges.
With who knows what judges it might be better to push defendants with discovery stage and trial.
I saw a guy in my district got approved after judge set trial date (he had lawyer)
I think I misread the original posting for what I wrote the reply. I thought that the poster asked what is the usual scenario in a lawsuit like these. I didn't mean to give an advice what course of action should be followed. What I described it is the course of action in the majority of the cases I saw in different districts.
But I have to agree; if you want a quick resolution for your case, probably it is the best strategy to file a Motion for Summary Judgement as soon as AUSA filed the Answer to your complaint. However, the summary judgement is a little bit like the russian roulette; I can imagine scenarios when you would like instead of the summary judgement a real hearing and force defendants to produce all sorts of documents in the discovery phase. They usually don't want to give out any of their internal documents and rather will expedite your case and adjudicate the petition/application than to produce the requested documents.
I'm personally better in face-to-face talks, I can persuade with higher success rate the other party when I have a chance to argue my case in person. But this is only my own personal feeling, experience, not necessary valid for everybody.
It is nothing to do with the Judges. I was talking about PROCEDURE. If you have additional 4-12 month to wait for resolution of your case, then go ahead. Probably you are on the early stage of your case, so u do not really understand what is going on with it. I also thought that grass is green and it is on my backyard, but in reality it is greener at the neighbour side.
Paz, after first MTD you write your own opposition. Then AUSA writes additional paper for support of their MTD. Then you wait another 2 weeks for judge case management hearing. Then you wait another 2 weeks for judge to answer. Then Judge gives you additional 2 weeks to make a schedule how r u planning to work on your case. In this schedule 1 month from the case management date (that will be 2 weeks after you signed your case management with AUSA), AUSA will be filing additional MTD, then you will file your SECOND opposition (good atttorney asks for 4 (four) weeks to do it), then AUSA asks for additional 2 weeks to write a reply to your opposition. Then you wait additional 2 weeks or whatever is available day on Judge calendar. Then you go again to court and then you wait additional 2 weeks to let judge to decide what to do. And only THEN it will be summary judgement. Assumption that you wrote second EXCELLENt opposition and your case was not dismissed before it by judge. So, how much time get lost? I believe at least 4 month or as my attorney said now it might take up to 12 month, since AUSA will do whatever they want and none of us knows the law here.
My advice is to hire attorney as soon as you file the case. You can find an attorney who will work on hourly based schedule and you will put it in your motion, that you want your attorney to be reimbursed.
Or not to do it, if you have all time in the word to wait for additional years for NC clearance.
swimfitness
Registered Users (C)
You did the right thing. AUSA usually keeps his/her word. They will file MTD to dismiss your case as moot, I hope.
In the meantime, you can prepare a banquet and invite all of us to celebrate with you
Thank you, Lazycis.
I sure hope AUSA is sincere and the day I receive that adjudication notice from USCIS will be a day worth celebrating. I will forever owe much gratitute to this forum and to its active participants.
I'm cautiously optimistic. Everyone is having different experience with this process, the response from AUSA...etc. I sure hope that Kefira's experience is not everyone's.
I will follow up, as the case progresses.
Cheers,
I dont know if this helps in opposition to MTD but the ombudsman office has identified name check as one of the processes to be fixed this year. Please send yor experiences and comments to the email on this page:
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1172359525682.shtm
http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1172359525682.shtm
Good point, lotechguy. I actually e-mailed CIS ombudsman and told about my experience and made a suggestion how to fix name checks. I've got a response the same day. Ombudsman actually thanked me and told that I should also submit a separate case problem to him by mail. He is in process of writing his annual report, so he can use our experiences and suggestions.
I did a search on http://dockets.justia.com/ for filings under chertoff between Jan 2006 and April 2007 and came up with 1800 for all federal courts.
Assuming some of these are not name check related (very small number possibly) and others may have been missed due to other indexes ie name check cases other than under chertoff, it is a goo estimate that there are around 1500 to 1700 cases filed between Jan 2006 and April 2007 on the name check problem. From Ombudsman page it looks like about 200K+ are stuck in name check, so it is safe to assume 10% of the stuck people out there are filing. If this percentage goes up to say 50% , Federal Courts will be swamped.
Assuming some of these are not name check related (very small number possibly) and others may have been missed due to other indexes ie name check cases other than under chertoff, it is a goo estimate that there are around 1500 to 1700 cases filed between Jan 2006 and April 2007 on the name check problem. From Ombudsman page it looks like about 200K+ are stuck in name check, so it is safe to assume 10% of the stuck people out there are filing. If this percentage goes up to say 50% , Federal Courts will be swamped.
hopeforall2
Registered Users (C)
Thanks paz / kefira and all friends for your valuable experience and help making sense of this mess.
I will keep you informed of any updates .
Best of luck to all.
I will keep you informed of any updates .
Best of luck to all.