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

snglnd said:
I scheduled Infopass appointment tomorrow. I want to know some details about my status of my I-485 application, not the general information, like my case is pending. However I do not know what kind of information that I can get out of this appointment and I do not want to waste my time and chance to know it.

Could anyone do me a huge favor to tell me what questions (in details) I should ask them? Maybe like whether my NC is cleared? Where is my case now? Why did I get 2nd FP don early this year without any further progress? et al. Thanks a lot!
Click to expand...

Hi Snglnd, any updates from your infopass?
 
paz1960 said:
Actually, bsus, I think that you are absolutely right. Not returning phone calls and not replying e-mails is not only a sign of bad manners, it is even against the rules. You have absolutely the right to confer with AUSA during the lawsuit. Here comes again a citation from the N.D. Cal Pro Se handbook which explains this:

What should I do before the initial case management conference?
There are several things the parties should do to prepare before the initial case management conference. As explained in more detail below, the parties are expected to call each other or meet in person, in a process that is called meeting and conferring, and try to agree on a number of issues. These include: making a single proposal for how and when discovery will be done (if a joint proposed discovery plan is required); deciding whether to submit the case to arbitration, mediation, or early neutral evaluation; and preparing the joint case management statement. Among other things, the joint case management statement tells the court the results of your meetings and what positions you have both taken about issues such as discovery and arbitration.

The requirements for case management conferences are explained in detail in Civil Local Rules 16-1 through 16-10, and in Rules 16(b) and 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. You should also check your judge’s standing order, which may have additional rules.

Why do I have to meet and confer?
The point of meeting with the other side and conferring about issues like scheduling, discovery and resolving the case is to save everyone time, work out what you can before going to court, and to make sure both sides are clear on each other’s views. Under Rule 26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, unless the case is in one of the categories listed in Rule 26(a)(1)(E), all parties must meet and confer at least 21 days before the case management conference to:
1. Discuss the nature and basis of their claims;
2. Discuss whether there is a way to resolve the case quickly and informally through a settlement;
3. Arrange for initial disclosure of information by both sides as required by Rule 26(a)(1). This includes exchanging the names and contact information of every person who is likely to have information about the issues, certain documents (described in Rule 26(a)), and various other information described in that section; and
4. Develop a proposed discovery plan.
The meet-and-confer is also referred to as a “Rule 26(f) conference.”
Click to expand...


Paz as usual is right :)
And this is exactly what I meant when was talking about "submitting some papers together". But, Bsus (again as I understood) was trying to contact Olsen before he filed for an answer I guess. Before an answer from AUSA there is nothing to sign and you just patiently waiting and waiting and waiting. After the answer, you have to sign together ADR (in my case) phone conference schedule and participate in it. This was the first time when I called AUSA and she did not return my call and I started to worry. So, what I did? I called court and asked them what to do, and they told me to sign the paper by myself and fax it to them without AUSA signature and explain the situation. Then I faxed another letter to my AUSA where I expressed my worries about missing the deadline and also faxed her my signed copy that I already faxed to court clerk. To my joy, we did not miss the deadline and somebody took over this document and processed it, since my AUSA was very very sick. (Paper was on fax machine with my letter and some secretary picked it up). Yes, we are all people and can be sick.
After this we met already in the court (for the first time). And very recently again on the due date we exchanged back and forward another form with another new schedule, some modified wording, etc. When she did not like my wording she called me immediately (2 min after receiving an email from me) and tried to argue and push me, but I was firm.
Oh yes, I had another encounter with her: I sent her a question about my opposition (how to file it) and she answered and helped me to do it.
So, who is right? Me/Paz/You/AUSA? Everybody has his own opinion. But trust me, they are working hard and I do not justify/oppoze anybody's behaviour. Also it depends on personality. I am shy and do not like to bother people too much and expect same from others. I know that I need to do my 100% best and the rest (AUSA behaviour) does not depends on me. If he has some new info for me, he will contact me first, since he is doing his job/responsibility and he has boss who is watching after him.
 
lotechguy said:
What is the Chevron case as it relates to us ? I read an AUSA filed MTD where AUSA says that the judge must follow Chevron and take the agency (USCIS) interpretation of "examination" and not the plaintiffs which is "interview". Paz, riz, Snorlax, shvilli, others, Does anybody know what is chevron case
Click to expand...

I also noticed somewhere Chevron case, but I do not remember where. I will try to go over my pile over a weekend. Or may be somebody here mentioned it?
 
paz1960 said:
I think I found the explanation why kefira had so many short meetings with the judge and AUSA. This is from her district's Pro Se Handbook:

What is a status conference?
A status conference can also be called a “subsequent case management conference.” Regardless of which term is used, it is just a conference that the judge holds after an initial case management conference has happened, to check on the status of the case. The rule providing for subsequent case management conferences is Civil Local Rule 16-10(c). Some judges hold status or subsequent case management conferences regularly, while other judges schedule them only when there is a particular need. Generally, a subsequent case management conference is a chance for the parties to tell the judge about the progress of their case, and about any problems they have had in preparing for trial or in meeting the original schedule. In addition, there is a pretrial conference held shortly before trial, where the judge and the parties decide the procedures for the upcoming trial.
Click to expand...

You r right, except that I had TWO initial case management conferences, by which I surprised my attorney :) and on which AUSA would say every time that they work very hard and nobody should tell them when to finish.

What about another encounter with the Judge? I believe he had to tell us his verdict (it was after MTD and Opp), but he said that it will take him another 2 weeks to think about it.

Also, since my saga is not over yet ;), I supposed to have another hearing (fourth one) with magistrate judge and wait for his decision.

I believe I am a gold champion here :) At least yesterday I allowed myself to go to court house in jeans. BTW it is a great life time experience to be in the big room, stand in the middle of it in front of the judge and to speak out. I remember how I said my name for the first time in this court room and had to repeat it, because in the middle I lost my voice, since I was so nervous. And yes, it was very nice, when Judge yesterday asked me how I am doing and welcomed me back LOL

p.s. will I do it again? NO !!! Only with Attorney. Will you give to operate yourself to somebody without doctor license? No. Same here. But again IMHO.
 
I got a call this morning at 10.00 am from my lawyer that he was on his way to file the petition, he confirmed that he is sending me a copy and he will deliver one copy to the AUSA he works with in these cases, apparently there is one AUSA who is helpful to him. He says there should be an informal hearing in judge's chambers soon.
 
paz1960 said:
I respectfully disagree. At least in my case, AUSA was indeed helpful, I think that my case was finished in reasonable time partly because he was making inquiries at FBI and USCIS and the last thing: arranging the oath ceremony in a record time was definitely his (and his assistant's) merit.
Click to expand...
I agree with paz1960. Calling AUSA and putting a face (ok, most often - voice) behind the paper helps, especially if you manage to assure that you are easily accessible, trying to help and reduce their workload to a min. From my experience, I think at that point they feel that it is the USCIS and FBI that they need to push. It certainly depends, but personal touch rarely does harm.

Best of luck,
snorlax
 
My AUSA told me that “without prejudice” not only means that one can bring another lawsuit regarding the same matter, but also reopen the instant case dismissed based on joint stipulation to dismiss. I asked her to confirm that I understood it correctly and she did. Any comments?

Best of luck,
snorlax
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lotechguy said:
What is the Chevron case as it relates to us ? I read an AUSA filed MTD where AUSA says that the judge must follow Chevron and take the agency (USCIS) interpretation of "examination" and not the plaintiffs which is "interview". Paz, riz, Snorlax, shvilli, others, Does anybody know what is chevron case
Click to expand...
Yes, it is often referred to in legislation involving governmental agencies. One can get a good general sense what it is all about here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevron_U.S.A.,_Inc._v._Natural_Resources_Defense_Council,_Inc.
in greater detailes here
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0467_0837_ZS.html
and here http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0467_0837_ZO.html

Best of luck!
snorlax
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kefira said:
Paz as usual is right :)
And this is exactly what I meant when was talking about "submitting some papers together". But, Bsus (again as I understood) was trying to contact Olsen before he filed for an answer I guess. Before an answer from AUSA there is nothing to sign and you just patiently waiting and waiting and waiting. After the answer, you have to sign together ADR (in my case) phone conference schedule and participate in it. This was the first time when I called AUSA and she did not return my call and I started to worry. So, what I did? I called court and asked them what to do, and they told me to sign the paper by myself and fax it to them without AUSA signature and explain the situation. Then I faxed another letter to my AUSA where I expressed my worries about missing the deadline and also faxed her my signed copy that I already faxed to court clerk. To my joy, we did not miss the deadline and somebody took over this document and processed it, since my AUSA was very very sick. (Paper was on fax machine with my letter and some secretary picked it up). Yes, we are all people and can be sick.
After this we met already in the court (for the first time). And very recently again on the due date we exchanged back and forward another form with another new schedule, some modified wording, etc. When she did not like my wording she called me immediately (2 min after receiving an email from me) and tried to argue and push me, but I was firm.
Oh yes, I had another encounter with her: I sent her a question about my opposition (how to file it) and she answered and helped me to do it.
So, who is right? Me/Paz/You/AUSA? Everybody has his own opinion. But trust me, they are working hard and I do not justify/oppoze anybody's behaviour. Also it depends on personality. I am shy and do not like to bother people too much and expect same from others. I know that I need to do my 100% best and the rest (AUSA behaviour) does not depends on me. If he has some new info for me, he will contact me first, since he is doing his job/responsibility and he has boss who is watching after him.
Click to expand...


You have misunderstanding about what I said. But be it, we don't have to spend too much time on my case.

The bottom line is I believe we should try to make contact with AUSA, and we deserve at least a reply. The fact that AUSA never answered phone call make me think whether he answers any phone call at all.

You are right, if AUSA does not respond at all, you can always submit whatever form by yourself. I guess the law does not say he must pick up Plaintiff's phone call, just like nobody says you must answer "hi" to a stranger when you are greeted on the street.
 
kefira said:
Please do not learn from me, since I am not a G-d and I have my own opinion that nobody should follow. What r u trying to get from him? Could you please be more specific? What kind of success r u trying to achieve? Do you have any new information that you can add to your initial complain? Then just file ammendment. Do not u think he wants exactly the same as u want to get rid of your case asap? There is a procedure in a court that you and him should follow. Trust me, if he would have some update for you, he would call you first. AUSAs are not our friends, they r on the other site and although they are simpatetic to us to some extend (they do not know what kind of nightmare is to leave without right papers in this country) they cannot do much.
If there is a paper to sign together, then it his responsibility to contact you and get your signature, because u r ProSe and he is a professional that is familiar with the court procedure and should follow it. I had to sign twice document with AUSA and every time we did on the last day. Only once I remind her through email that I want to see the document, but she sent me it the night before the due date. There is a court procedure that everybody follows. It does not depend on AUSA to give priority to your case or put it at the bottom of the pile. There are some other figures WHO decide how to proceed with our applications.
Do you have an attorney? Is INS affraid to loose thousands of dollars in case that u win? If both answers are "NO", then please prepare to wait and fight till end as I do and probably I am the oldest member on this forum who is still in process.
Your AUSA is a very nice guy. I talked to him only for 5 minutes, but I liked him and trust me he is overwhelmed with the cases.
Click to expand...

Firstly thanks for the information.
At least somebody did talk to him. So is he your AUSA as well?

In addition, of course AUSA/defendants want to get rid of our cases as soon as possible, but they are trying achieve this goal by delaying the case as long as they can. Otherwise they won't have to always wait until last day/minute to file MTD or Answer or CMS ....
 
bsus said:
Otherwise they won't have to always wait until last day/minute to file MTD or Answer or CMS ....
Click to expand...

Completely wrong conclusion. They answer on the last day, because they hope that your case will be resolved before it and they won't need to file anything at all. Have not u been a student once? Did u submit your homeworks always 2 weeks in advance before dead line? I doubt it. I submitted my homework on the day of submission with hope that may be I will get an additional time (specially night) :)
I agree that AUSA try to delay all process (for example my case), but they achieve it in a different way and you DO NOT HAVE to agree how your case will go. It is between you and them. So if u voluntary agree for an extension, as some people here, then it is their decision to delay their case. If you do not ask immediately for cross-summary judgement and ready to go through enormous hearings, additional paperwork, change judges (as I did), then it is my problem (and reason for delay).
Olsen is not my AUSA, I met him once when he was substituting my AUSA. And again I want to tell you that he is a very polite and nice guy and please be patient. When did u submit your case and on what stage are u in now?
 
lotechguy said:
What is the Chevron case as it relates to us ? I read an AUSA filed MTD where AUSA says that the judge must follow Chevron and take the agency (USCIS) interpretation of "examination" and not the plaintiffs which is "interview". Paz, riz, Snorlax, shvilli, others, Does anybody know what is chevron case
Click to expand...

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=467&invol=837

However, 8 CRF § 335.3 clearly says:
(a) The Service officer shall grant the application if the applicant has complied with all requirements for naturalization under this chapter. A decision to grant or deny the application shall be made at the time of the initial examination or within 120-days after the date of the initial examination of the applicant for naturalization under §335.2.

It does say date of the initial examination. Date here is a specific date, not a process. It also mentions initial examination. I am not sure how else they can interpret it. In Chevron case, SC mentioned that agency interpretation should be reasonable.
 
lotechguy said:
What is the Chevron case as it relates to us ? I read an AUSA filed MTD where AUSA says that the judge must follow Chevron and take the agency (USCIS) interpretation of "examination" and not the plaintiffs which is "interview". Paz, riz, Snorlax, shvilli, others, Does anybody know what is chevron case
Click to expand...
Again, per USCIS internal memo, it is their own interpretation that "examination"="interview". In light of this memo Chevron should not be relevant anymore. You can find this memo attached to message #9642, page 643.

Best of luck,
snorlax
 
mmz said:
Hi Missingpa,
If you look at the following thread, http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=244876
there are several people filed WOM, transfered from VSC to TSC, had 2nd FP, and now case transfered back to VSC.

I have the same situation, will go for 2nd FP, code 3 tomorrow. Is your 2nd FP code 1 or 3?

regards,
mmz
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Hi mmz,
What's the difference between code 1 and code 3. How to find out if a FP is code 1 or code 3?
Thanks!
 
Hello, guys:
If the AUSA quote a case, given case as xx v. xxx, 2006 WL 938523 (E.D. Pa), how do I find the case number?
thanks
 
In my case, it was noted in my FP notification letter.
Just had my FP done yesterday, on the worksheet I filled out, it shows code 1: fingerprints, code 2: biometrics (means photo and signature,I think), code 3: fingerprints&biometrics. They circled code 3 for me.

ddwalker said:
Hi mmz,
What's the difference between code 1 and code 3. How to find out if a FP is code 1 or code 3?
Thanks!
Click to expand...
 
N400 Application- Preparing for WOM regarding FBI Name Check

What are the steps for building up a case for WOM against delay in FBI Name CHeck Process?

I am already scheduling InfoPass appointments once every month and building the record that I am following up.

Should I apply for FOIPA in order to prove that the delay is only administrative and there is no real reason?

How long should I wait after my N400 is filed before applying for WOM?
I have not been called for an interview yet.
 
united2007 said:
here are the remaining two
Click to expand...

Hi, united2007:
I am bothering you again. I was trying to get case files that have been cited in my MTD and also the Norton and Manzoor cases. But with the format xxx vs xxx, 2007 WL 413227 (E.D. Va), I could not find them. Snorlax sent me a website, I still can't get them. I must have done some not correctly.
So, if you could give me a clue and thanks a million.
 
snorlax said:
I would use http://dockets.justia.com/ - just type your xx in “Party name”, hit “Search” and it is (very likely) going to give the case info.

Best of luck,
snorlax
Click to expand...


Snorlax:
Thank you so much for your email. I tried the website, but with this particular one, I still can't find it. I will try again and also asked United2007. ;)

I want to ask you and maybe others that have any thoughts on this.
When I filed my complaint (1/31/07), for the Prayer for relief, what I wrote was to ask "the court requring the defendants to adjudicte my application for acting on an approved petition". I have read a lot of opposition where the plaintiff argued they only want defendants to act on their case, not to approve the case. Since I have written to ask for a approval, I guess it is not good. Is there anyway I can say something about it, not just to avoid it? In the MTD, AUSA didn't really bring this up, though. They focused on the "the court lacks subject matter juridiction to grant relief under either statutory framwork."

Thanks a lot!
41906
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top