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

Front page article in today's washington times

FBI Name Check Cited In Naturalization Delays
Official Calls Backlog 'Unacceptable'

By Spencer S. Hsu and N.C. Aizenman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, June 17, 2007; A01



Jin Ju Yoo, a stay-at-home mother who immigrated from South Korea in 1990 and applied for U.S. citizenship in 2002, would seem a minimal security risk. So say friends in Clarksburg, Md., where Yoo, 36, plays drums at a Presbyterian church and raises three children with her husband, a flooring contractor. Her husband and children are citizens.

The would-be American is still waiting for approval, however, because the FBI has not completed a security check of her name against its more than 86 million investigative files. Neither the bureau nor the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency will say why.

Since 2005, the backlog of legal U.S. immigrants whose applications for naturalization and other benefits are stuck on hold awaiting FBI name checks has doubled to 329,160, prompting a flood of lawsuits in federal courts, bureaucratic finger-pointing in Washington and tough scrutiny by 2008 presidential candidates.

At a time when Congress is intensely focused on border security, the growing backlog is one of the most visible signs of the U.S. immigration system's breakdown, current and former government officials said.

Unexplained delays in determining whether longtime residents pose a threat promise neither justice to the applicants nor added security to the country, they said. They blame bureaucratic mismanagement and poor coordination at the FBI and the immigration service, and the inefficient methods of screening files for genuine security threats.

In his annual report to Congress last week, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) ombudsman Prakash I. Khatri called the backlog of FBI name checks "unacceptable from the standpoint of national security and immigration benefits processing."

Calling the delays the "most pervasive problem" in processing, Khatri concluded that they "may increase the risk to national security by prolonging the time a potential criminal or terrorist remains in the country." He concluded that the agency should end or sharply narrow its use of name checks.

As Dawn Lurie, a Vienna immigration lawyer, put it: "If there's a security reason [for the delay], then what are those people still doing here? . . . And if there isn't a security reason, then why are we making them wait for so long?"

The withholding of citizenship -- and the continuation of the attendant restrictions on voting, employment, travel, reunification with family members, and access to credit and federal assistance programs -- replicates on a far vaster and more damaging scale the inconvenience rendered to travelers who are mistakenly placed on no-fly lists because of spelling confusions or errors, civil liberties lawyers said.

Some lawyers warn that such burdens may be discriminatory if they fall disproportionately on people perceived to be from Muslim countries or from ethnic groups whose names are transliterated from non-Roman alphabets. But others representing individuals in the Washington area or participating in four national class-action lawsuits over the delays say the most distinctive -- and frustrating -- feature is their seeming randomness, and the refusal of agencies to say when checks will be done or why problems have arisen.

Seong Ho Kang, 40, a computer engineer from South Korea who lives in Centreville, has waited for more than a year for his FBI check, possibly because the bureau since 2001 has intensified the scrutiny of immigrants with high-technology backgrounds. In frustration, Kang submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for any records the FBI might have on him. The bureau promptly replied that it had none. "If they can tell that to me, why can't they tell it to immigration?" Kang asked.

Donald Kerr, 60, the Jamaican-born lead singer of the Wailers, Bob Marley's reggae group, applied for U.S. citizenship more than three years ago after marrying a U.S. citizen. Kerr, a British citizen who goes by the stage name Junior Marvin, lives in Alexandria. "I'm not trying to put Homeland Security down. I mean, they have to do what they have to do," he said, sitting in his basement amid a mass of guitars, amplifiers and sound-mixing equipment. "But it does seem like a long time to check up on a musician."

The backlog started growing after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when investigators determined that a failure to properly process immigration applications contributed to the hijackers' ability to enter and stay in the country. U.S. authorities responded by broadly expanding background checks.

FBI name checks, in particular, were intensified after errors and a lack of cooperation between the FBI and immigration authorities in Newark led to the October 2002 naturalization of a man suspected of ties to Hezbollah, which is designated a terrorist group. A policy decision was made to check applicants' names not only against the list of individuals under investigation by the FBI but also against the list of those named in investigative files for any reason.

The result was tumultuous. At the end of 2002, immigration authorities resubmitted 2.7 million names of applicants to the FBI for additional scrutiny. More than five years later, the FBI is only now emerging from that huge load, with about 5,800 names left to be rechecked.

But FBI officials say a heavy workload is not the only problem. They also blame inadequate staffing and technology, as well as a decentralized, paper-based process of status review.

About 90 percent of name checks, officials say, emerge with no matches within three months, after an automated search of databases. But the remaining 10 percent can take months or years, as 30 analysts and assistants must coordinate with 56 field offices and retrieve files stored in 265 locations nationwide.

As a result, the FBI has fallen further behind on the 1.5 million new names it receives each year from USCIS. Of about 329,000 cases pending as of May, 64 percent were stalled for more than 90 days, 32 percent for more than one year and 17 percent for more than two years.

"No one is happy with the status quo," said USCIS Deputy Director Jonathan "Jock" Scharfen. "We share the public's unhappiness with this, and we're committed to improving the process."

"We're trying to automate this as much as possible," said Michael Cannon, head of the FBI's National Name Check Program. He said the section's disruptive move from Washington to Frederick County, Va., also hindered work in 2006.

Cannon said the completion of a new Central Records System and progress toward a long-delayed, $600 million FBI computerized case-management system will help. "I can't give you a date certain when all this is going to come to fruition. My best guess is 2010," he said.

USCIS officials say they are reviewing their procedures but remain committed to detailed checks, which they call an effective tool in identifying security threats and verifying eligibility for citizenship. Even just a few terrorists can wreak havoc, the program's supporters note.

While USCIS declined to provide the number or percentage of annual name checks that result in denials, the FBI has reported that less than 1 percent of 1.5 million names are ultimately tied to potentially damaging information.

The backlog appears likely to get worse, because a USCIS fee increase -- slated to take effect in July -- has prompted a 50 percent rise in new naturalization applications so far this year. If a new immigration bill is enacted, millions of undocumented immigrants would also apply for legalization.

Frustrations among applicants have helped stoke a fourfold increase in litigation against USCIS since the middle of 2006. Critics emphasize that applicants for naturalization, by definition, are longtime residents who have lived and worked in the United States with few restrictions.

Khatri, in his June 11 report, said that given other automated security checks, "the protection the FBI name check provides, the cost of government resources used, and mental and actual hardships to applicants and their families, USCIS should reassess the continuation of its policy."

For now, tens of thousands of legal residents remain in limbo, exacting a toll on them and their employers. Pavel Kroupnik, a Russian economist who came to the United States in 1991 and sought citizenship three years ago, works at the nuclear energy firm USEC Inc. in Bethesda and directs the conversion of weapons-grade uranium from Russian nuclear warheads into fuel for commercial nuclear power plants -- a key U.S.-Russian nonproliferation effort.

But Kroupnik, 46, a Rockville resident, has been unable to get a security clearance and fuller responsibilities because he is not a citizen, even though his employer had conducted its own two-year investigation of his background before hiring him. "When immigration said we need to do a background check, I said, 'Guys, check your own [files].' The CIA, the FBI, the KGB -- they all know who I am and what I'm doing," Kroupnik said.

Adriana Rivera, a Mexican-born housecleaner living in Woodbridge, has been stymied in a different way: She cannot see her elderly parents in Veracruz, Mexico, because she holds a temporary work permit and would be unable to return if she left the United States while awaiting the background check she needs to become a legal permanent resident.

Her husband sailed through his background check and obtained a green card nearly two years ago even though he applied at the same time as Rivera.

"Every time my husband goes back to visit Mexico, I cry because I can't go with him," Rivera said. "I miss my family so much. It's a feeling of desperation."
 
not available after filing the lawsuit?

I'm going to file 1447b pro se tomorrow. I think I'm well prepared and ready!

3 more questions:

1. How to find out when the NC is cleared after the lawsuit? Only through AUSA?
When I checked with USCIS I was told they received "a response from FBI" in April, but they refused to tell me/senator/congressman what that was - NC clearence? or just a correspondence of a inquiry?

2. If for any unexpected emergency reasons that I HAVE to travel abroad for some days after filing my lawsuit, will I be able to request something like a "temperary leave of absense" from the court, so that I won't miss any important decision point or deadlines. Any suggestions please?

3. I noticed in my district, the AUSA always refused the Magistrate judge, so should I refuse him right away when I file the lawsuit, in order to save some time, because in 20 days, AUSA will refuse him anyway then we all have to wait for a new judge to be assigned.

Thank you very much!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cases to consider: these cases were posted before, but for the benefit of several members I'm re-posting them here:
 
My I485 was pending in Texas. There was not LUD after I did my second Fingerprint in this May.

Are I485 applications transfered to General Counsel, DC after we file the WOM?Does anybody know wheher it is true or not?
 
zenusa becomes CitizenUSA

My wife also got her second finger printing done on April-28th'2007. We have not heard anything since then. Please update with your case after second finger printing.

Type: N400
PD: April-2005
Interview: Aug-2005
Second Fingerprinting: Apr'28-2007
Waiting for the update


If you are still around, I attended my oath ceremony today after that 2nd fingerprinting on May 10th '07. I am glad that 2nd FP was not a fluke. 2 weeks after the 10th I InfoPassed and found out that everything is clear. Just wait for the Oath letter, they said. Finally that day came. Had I filed for the lawsuit, I am sure it would have been faster but i really don't need to think about that right now. I am just :D :D :D

Thanks to all of you for your support through out this year and half. I have learned a great deal from lot of you people. I will still be around; I have to deal with that I-130 stuff. Thank you and Good luck to all of you who are still suffering.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
snorlax,

I am really hoping that since my NC is cleared, this last check from USCIS should be a quick one.QUOTE]

How do you know your name check has been completed?
What is the last check from USCIS?

I am on the same boat, but I am considering filing WOM in October as my attorney thinks we should wait at least 1.5 year.
 
I am on the same boat, but I am considering filing WOM in October as my attorney thinks we should wait at least 1.5 year.

My attorney told me the same thing when I was pushing him for the lawsuit.14th months after the interview, I recieved the 2nd FP and oath letter a month later. If you have the time, wait a little more if not go for it. Good luck either way.
 
Name check

snorlax,

How do you know your name check has been completed?
What is the last check from USCIS?

I am on the same boat, but I am considering filing WOM in October as my attorney thinks we should wait at least 1.5 year.

Hi springbranch,
To answer your question relating to NC, the attorney I had hired few months back had gone to the DO thru InfoPass in March and was told by one of the officers there that my name check is cleared. Later she even showed me few e-mails from the supervisor at the DO who deals with Naturalization saying that my NC is cleared and then lately I also went to the DO and was told the same thing that NC is cleared so I am pretty sure that's the case and don't have any doubts regarding NC.
Did you fly from Atlanta ? Who is the attorney you spoke to?
 
120 days reamnd

i am a silent reader and i have a quick question if anyone has gone thru this pls help.... my name check has been pending since 2003 i have filed pro se and after 2 (60) days extension and mtd by defandants and oppostion to remand the judge remanded back to uscis without any instructions ...but i filed amotion judge called me and the defandant for a hearing ...defandants changed their lawyers at lst minute ticked of magistrate judge he heard me and i requsted 30 days remand with instructions ....but judge insisted on giving them more time and sended my case packing to uscis with instructions of 120 days to process my name check which is about to be up on july 7th question is wht will i have to file another motion remindig judge tht nothing has happened?what will be the heading of my motion...i knw i am aiming for a trial but wht should i ask judge...?stuck in texas on my next move ....i have worked real hard on this case....i kw i can file a motion agian but need little guidance on how to start wht would be my heading and :( finish
 
If you are still around, I attended my oath ceremony today after that 2nd fingerprinting on May 10th '07. I am glad that 2nd FP was not a fluke. 2 weeks after the 10th I InfoPassed and found out that everything is clear. Just wait for the Oath letter, they said. Finally that day came. Had I filed for the lawsuit, I am sure it would have been faster but i really don't need to think about that right now. I am just :D :D :D

Thanks to all of you for your support through out this year and half. I have learned a great deal from lot of you people. I will still be around; I have to deal with that I-130 stuff. Thank you and Good luck to all of you who are still suffering.

Congratulations!
My wife has not received anything from USCIS after the second fingerprint. It seems that there is some hope.
 
US Citizenship

Good day,

Thinking of hiring a lawer to expedite my FBI name check and N-400 processing.

Any idea how much this would cost me?

B.Rgds
AZ
 
i am a silent reader and i have a quick question if anyone has gone thru this pls help.... my name check has been pending since 2003 i have filed pro se and after 2 (60) days extension and mtd by defandants and oppostion to remand the judge remanded back to uscis without any instructions ...but i filed amotion judge called me and the defandant for a hearing ...defandants changed their lawyers at lst minute ticked of magistrate judge he heard me and i requsted 30 days remand with instructions ....but judge insisted on giving them more time and sended my case packing to uscis with instructions of 120 days to process my name check which is about to be up on july 7th question is wht will i have to file another motion remindig judge tht nothing has happened?what will be the heading of my motion...i knw i am aiming for a trial but wht should i ask judge...?stuck in texas on my next move ....i have worked real hard on this case....i kw i can file a motion agian but need little guidance on how to start wht would be my heading and :( finish

samhad, I'm not sure that I understood you correctly, but if the judge remanded finally your case to USCIS with an instruction to complete your name check in 120 days and this will expire only on July 7th, be assured that it is VERY likely that USCIS will have something by then. I don't believe that they are risking to disobey the judge's ruling, it happens very rarely. You should wait till then, or shortly before the 120 days deadline expires you should try to contact AUSA and ask him/her what is the status of your case and remind him/her about the judge's order. In the unlikely event that nothing happens, we can try to help you with a brief motion. I bet that the judge will be really angry that USCIS disobeyed his/her order.
 
interesting way to gain time in WOM

If in your WOM the AUSA says that they have asked for expedite but no news yet and 60 days have passed and AUSA needs to file a some response, its either going to be extension or an asnwer or more often now in some districts, MTD. I saw on pacer what may be one way to avoid an MTD or an answer when you know AUSA has asked for expedite but AUSA themselves wont ask for extension : You may be able to file a joint motion to stay proceedings for 2 months stating that AUSA has requested expedite and you will request a 2 month stay in proceedings to see if that will result in a resolution in the interest of judicial economy. Of course the AUSA has to agree too. I saw this on a recent a case in pacer (dont remember the case). Any ideas if this approach is better to avoid MTD and to give the expedite more time ? Is theer any advantages to getting to end of the case quicky ?
 
remand 120

well paz thanx for ur encoraging reply.....the reason i am so discouraged is i did contact ausa lawyer who showed for hearing and who was replaced at the last minute (before the case was remanded )tht"s why the judge got mad he didn"t have no idea about the case back than he was reading stuff wht other lawyer has given him and he said to the judge my case was 90% complete ....and i attacked his argument at the end judge agreed with me saying even a probation officer can process f/p in 24 hrs but uscis had 1000 days....magistrate told me clear cut tht he works for govt and tht he can"t give an quick hasty descions....but with 120 days remand uscis should complete their 10% but now discouraging part my ausa when contacted didn"t knw me....he asked me to read the motion tht was set by court he even asked me wht the case was about....and tht he was just a temp lawyer hired by govt to shw up on tht day....and tht i should contact defandants directly i reminded him he was their lawyer he quipped and said it was temp job and he is not handling my case...i got mad i am going to write a letter to the judge at this he said remind me when 120 days is up i told him i wasn"t his secretary ....so iam really nervous how can ausa hire a lawyer who clearly said my case was not imp and tht to him cases tht are pending litagation r and mine ain"t?shocked me tht he really don"t knw me or has no idea about a case....wht should i do wait ........and prepare a strong motion with u guys giving me few tips would but final touches to my motion:(
 
Help with MTD

Hi,
I filed a WOM for my pending I 485,the defendants came back with motion to dismiss.Are there any good examples of MTD.I tried to look on pacer but it will not open any documents.I filed in Eastern District of Virginia.Please help.

Thanks.
 
well paz thanx for ur encoraging reply.....the reason i am so discouraged is i did contact ausa lawyer who showed for hearing and who was replaced at the last minute (before the case was remanded )tht"s why the judge got mad he didn"t have no idea about the case back than he was reading stuff wht other lawyer has given him and he said to the judge my case was 90% complete ....and i attacked his argument at the end judge agreed with me saying even a probation officer can process f/p in 24 hrs but uscis had 1000 days....magistrate told me clear cut tht he works for govt and tht he can"t give an quick hasty descions....but with 120 days remand uscis should complete their 10% but now discouraging part my ausa when contacted didn"t knw me....he asked me to read the motion tht was set by court he even asked me wht the case was about....and tht he was just a temp lawyer hired by govt to shw up on tht day....and tht i should contact defandants directly i reminded him he was their lawyer he quipped and said it was temp job and he is not handling my case...i got mad i am going to write a letter to the judge at this he said remind me when 120 days is up i told him i wasn"t his secretary ....so iam really nervous how can ausa hire a lawyer who clearly said my case was not imp and tht to him cases tht are pending litagation r and mine ain"t?shocked me tht he really don"t knw me or has no idea about a case....wht should i do wait ........and prepare a strong motion with u guys giving me few tips would but final touches to my motion:(

It looks like some AUSAs really learn fast to act sloppy and nasty which they would never dare to do with a professional counsel. But I am afraid this situation of many pro se litigants who 're forced to file to get imm-n benefits is evloving in front of our eyes into abuse of professional power: some jerks holding AUSA positions quickly learn that since pro se are quite harmless comparing to a professional, they can mistreat and abuse us the way they wont's never dare otherwise.

samhad10,

if your AUSA indeed as much as hinted in a private conversation that your case isn't as important as some other cases he's assigned to, I am sure you should have a right to complain to his supervisor. Although I haven't looked into it yet, but I suggest to see if you can complain to the US Attorneys Office, perhaps the Bar Assiciation??? (Seniors, Paz, please advise!). Also, you should have a right to complain to the judge if AUSA intentionally stalls your case. But since you said, judge already ruled to remand for 120 days, I agree with Paz that unless there is something specific AUSA refuses to act on right now, don't bother the judge about this and just wait for CIS to act. Meanwhile, you can inquire about your routes to complain about misconduct of this temp AUSA you encountered.

Like I said, I'd probably be mad too but perhaps right now I wouldn't risk to get your judge mad also, but instead see if you can file a complaint with the District Attorneys office.

Paz and other seniors, please comment!
 
Hi,
I filed a WOM for my pending I 485,the defendants came back with motion to dismiss.Are there any good examples of MTD.I tried to look on pacer but it will not open any documents.I filed in Eastern District of Virginia.Please help.

Thanks.
Zaib,

You probably mean you need examples of Oppositions to MTD? Mingjing posted a great deal of them and the judges' favorable decisions here (on and around p.743 of this forum):

http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=194681&page=743

(couple of cases I reposted just 2 pages ago)

Good luck!
 
Please Read it!!

well paz thanx for ur encoraging reply.....the reason i am so discouraged is i did contact ausa lawyer who showed for hearing and who was replaced at the last minute (before the case was remanded )tht"s why the judge got mad he didn"t have no idea about the case back than he was reading stuff wht other lawyer has given him and he said to the judge my case was 90% complete ....and i attacked his argument at the end judge agreed with me saying even a probation officer can process f/p in 24 hrs but uscis had 1000 days....magistrate told me clear cut tht he works for govt and tht he can"t give an quick hasty descions....but with 120 days remand uscis should complete their 10% but now discouraging part my ausa when contacted didn"t knw me....he asked me to read the motion tht was set by court he even asked me wht the case was about....and tht he was just a temp lawyer hired by govt to shw up on tht day....and tht i should contact defandants directly i reminded him he was their lawyer he quipped and said it was temp job and he is not handling my case...i got mad i am going to write a letter to the judge at this he said remind me when 120 days is up i told him i wasn"t his secretary ....so iam really nervous how can ausa hire a lawyer who clearly said my case was not imp and tht to him cases tht are pending litagation r and mine ain"t?shocked me tht he really don"t knw me or has no idea about a case....wht should i do wait ........and prepare a strong motion with u guys giving me few tips would but final touches to my motion:(


Paz , shvilli, lotechguy, lazycis,and all the members hello to everyone on the forum. How u folks are doing?? I already took my oath last week. Thanks again for all your help!!! Special thanks to Paz again!!! and best of luck to all who are stiil fightin!!! and sorry for not coming into the forum. I was busy with other things.

Dear smhad,
u should be calling USCIS customer service every second day and the reason is that as Paz said, they should be adjudicating your case any time soon. I think u should speak with the old AUSA(the real one and not the temp) and also explain situation to him. when u call the customer service, please tell those people the whole situation and ask to speak with the immigration officer. the people who pick up the phone have no clue about your case since u case is old as mine.
If u want to talk quickly, here is a tip(I learned this since I got mad myself calling them!!). when u call 1-800-375-5283, after pressing 1 for English, when he says "Thank You" then u need to press 2, then, 6, then 2 and then 4(Just remember 2,6,2,4). In this way, u do not have to wait for those stupid selections and they will pick up your call in a minute(after pressing each button, please wait for a second ,so that guy can tell the choices). In my case, I was calling after every seconed day and then, one day, the IO congratulated me and told me that my application has been approved and they already mailed me the oath letter.(I was amazed!!! because I had been calling them since two years and it was the same answer” Pending security checks"). In this way, u will also not waste your time on the info pass since IO(when u call them) can give u the same info that u get using an info pass.

ok, back to your case. One thing u can do if nothing happens even after writing a letter to the judge is that you can go to the court and ask for the Suphina(I know I am not spelling it correctly) and then u can send that to your local FBI office and I heard that it really works. It let the lazy FBI to move and clear your name check. Wenlock is expert on this. I do not know if he is still coming, but you can read his posts and he explained that very thoroughly what to do. I do not know if u will need to reopen the case if u wanna do this since the judge remand it back. I hope this info is helpful. I know it sucks man!!! I hope they approve your application and u get your citizenship ASAP. Best of luck!!!!!!!! regards,dude
 
Paz , shvilli, lotechguy, lazycis,and all the members hello to everyone on the forum. How u folks are doing?? I already took my oath last week. Thanks again for all your help!!! Special thanks to Paz again!!! and best of luck to all who are stiil fightin!!! and sorry for not coming into the forum. I was busy with other things.

Dear smhad,
u should be calling USCIS customer service every second day and the reason is that as Paz said, they should be adjudicating your case any time soon. I think u should speak with the old AUSA(the real one and not the temp) and also explain situation to him. when u call the customer service, please tell those people the whole situation and ask to speak with the immigration officer. the people who pick up the phone have no clue about your case since u case is old as mine.
If u want to talk quickly, here is a tip(I learned this since I got mad myself calling them!!). when u call 1-800-375-5283, after pressing 1 for English, when he says "Thank You" then u need to press 2, then, 6, then 2 and then 4(Just remember 2,6,2,4). In this way, u do not have to wait for those stupid selections and they will pick up your call in a minute(after pressing each button, please wait for a second ,so that guy can tell the choices). In my case, I was calling after every seconed day and then, one day, the IO congratulated me and told me that my application has been approved and they already mailed me the oath letter.(I was amazed!!! because I had been calling them since two years and it was the same answer” Pending security checks"). In this way, u will also not waste your time on the info pass since IO(when u call them) can give u the same info that u get using an info pass.

ok, back to your case. One thing u can do if nothing happens even after writing a letter to the judge is that you can go to the court and ask for the Suphina(I know I am not spelling it correctly) and then u can send that to your local FBI office and I heard that it really works. It let the lazy FBI to move and clear your name check. Wenlock is expert on this. I do not know if he is still coming, but you can read his posts and he explained that very thoroughly what to do. I do not know if u will need to reopen the case if u wanna do this since the judge remand it back. I hope this info is helpful. I know it sucks man!!! I hope they approve your application and u get your citizenship ASAP. Best of luck!!!!!!!! regards,dude



DUDE,

Congratulations!!! Enjoy being a citizen!

About subpoena, that's a good idea. Somehow I missed that info, so I'll search Wenlock's posts again. Did you do it yourself? We are still waiting, the answer is due July 7th, but so far no word from AUSA. (I called and left message, he didn't call back, so I guess we have to start that bugging game...:eek: )

About your advise to Samhad,:"I do not know if u will need to reopen the case if u wanna do this since the judge remand it back."
-don't judges usually keep jurisdiction until remand time limit is due to make sure CIS adjudicated? I saw many requests to keep jurisdiction until case resolved, but I thought they don't really close until case is granted. (It's frustrating that there's so much we need to know and still don't know about this ordeal:confused: ).

Good to hear form you, please stay with us on this forum!
 
If in your WOM the AUSA says that they have asked for expedite but no news yet and 60 days have passed and AUSA needs to file a some response, its either going to be extension or an asnwer or more often now in some districts, MTD. I saw on pacer what may be one way to avoid an MTD or an answer when you know AUSA has asked for expedite but AUSA themselves wont ask for extension : You may be able to file a joint motion to stay proceedings for 2 months stating that AUSA has requested expedite and you will request a 2 month stay in proceedings to see if that will result in a resolution in the interest of judicial economy. Of course the AUSA has to agree too. I saw this on a recent a case in pacer (dont remember the case). Any ideas if this approach is better to avoid MTD and to give the expedite more time ? Is theer any advantages to getting to end of the case quicky ?

Lo,

thank you for posting it! I really think if some of us get into this situation, it's helpful: you can avoid spending hours/days on preparing your brief by willing to wait an extra time so your case gets resolved. And it looks like judge shouldn't object to this motion as it actually may even save time for everyone.

We're not at this stage yet, but if we get to this, we'll try to do it. So far waiting for AUSA to call back (I just called again and left another message:( ).
 
Top