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

Bou said:
Have you filed opposition to MTD? At least based on the info on this forum, most cases got approved after NC cleared. As for the ruling of OPP to MTD, the judge can take whatever amount of time s/he feels necessary. My OPP to MTD was filed 2.5 months ago, still waiting, I read another member of this forum also waiting after 2-3 months of MTD. Frustrating!
Click to expand...

If judge does not do his/her job, you can petition to the Court of Appeals to isse writ of mandamus to compel the judge to do his/her duty.
You can also file a judical misconduct form with the court of appeals. Here is the quote from the rulebook for judical misconduct:

Section 351(a) of title 28 of the United States Code provides a way for any person to complain about a federal judge who the person believes “has engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts” or “is unable to discharge all the duties of office by reason of mental or physical disability.”1 Section 358 of title
28 of the United States Code permits the Judicial Councils of the circuits to adopt rules for the consideration of these complaints. These rules have been adopted under that authority.

So while there is no time limit for ruling, if the judge "engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts", there is a way to do something about it. Go to the website of your appelate court, it should have appropriate forms/rules to help you file judical misconduct complaint. This is just ridiculous, not just authorities put themselves above the law, but now the judges do the same.
 
Motion for summary judgment

nastena said:
Please explain what is the "Motion of Summry Judgement" and "Cross-motion MSJ"? How to oppose first? Can we oppose with cross-motion?
Any good examples? I only found Mohammed MSJ.
Little bit of my history:
File WOM in Feb 2007 Pro Se.
March 07 defendants filed Motion to dismiss
April 07 - MTD denied by Judje
June 07 - pretrial hearing->discovery start
end of June received discovery docs (not much info however)
July 07 - got MSJ
Any recommendation about subpoena? Is it possible to do ProSe.
We can't find any lawyer who be willing to proceed on our case. :(
Click to expand...

If a party moves for summary judgment, the other party can oppose it or file its own cross-motion for summary judjment. See rule 56 FRCP.
I am attaching a good sample of MSJ.
 
nastena said:
Please explain what is the "Motion of Summry Judgement" and "Cross-motion MSJ"? How to oppose first? Can we oppose with cross-motion?
Any good examples? I only found Mohammed MSJ.
Little bit of my history:
File WOM in Feb 2007 Pro Se.
March 07 defendants filed Motion to dismiss
April 07 - MTD denied by Judje
June 07 - pretrial hearing->discovery start
end of June received discovery docs (not much info however)
July 07 - got MSJ
Any recommendation about subpoena? Is it possible to do ProSe.
We can't find any lawyer who be willing to proceed on our case. :(
Click to expand...

When u say got MSJ do you mean that the defendants filed MSJ ? Even though the following link is not immigration related here's cross motion MSJ opposing Defendants MSJ

http://www.crag.org/documents/HRVRC-CrossMotionforSMJ.pdf
 
Time Frame for adjudication of immigration petitions.

I asked this question before and didn't get any reply. 8 U.S.C 1571 clearly states that

"It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration
benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days
after the initial filing of the application,"

The statement makes no differentiation based on what type of application is being submitted, could be AoS or naturalization or anything.

Is this a very good argument in MTDs where Defendants argue that there's no law that sets a time frame for the Attorney General to adjudicate on an AoS ? I don't see this being used in very many Opps to MTDs at all and I'm surprised.
 
AGC4ME said:
I asked this question before and didn't get any reply. 8 U.S.C 1571 clearly states that

"It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration
benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days
after the initial filing of the application,"

The statement makes no differentiation based on what type of application is being submitted, could be AoS or naturalization or anything.

Is this a very good argument in MTDs where Defendants argue that there's no law that sets a time frame for the Attorney General to adjudicate on an AoS ? I don't see this being used in very many Opps to MTDs at all and I'm surprised.
Click to expand...

It's just a desire of Congress, it is not a mandatory deadline. But, certainly, a good indication that Congress did not give AG authority to indefinitely delay action upon any application for innigration benefit.
 
MTD Discussion

Thanks lazycis. Safadi v Howard defines action (from Black's Law Dictionary) as "an act or series of acts" and then goes on to decide that action includes the entire process rather than just the decision from the action. Then it concludes saying that the court does not have jurisdiction over the I485 process because 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) precludes any action of the Attorney General from court's jurisdiction. Now how does Black's Law Dictionary define "act".

The "act" must have a timeline from start to finish. An act cannot mean a process that could be theoretically take any amount of time to complete. Does anyone here have access to Black's law dictionary. Would it be available in the local library. I want to look up how it defines act.
 
How to againt this point in MTD?

Dear all,
I received MTD Monday, for my I-485 WOM filed May 29. Here is one point raised by AUSA:
"IN the event the Court determines that it has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $1331 in conjunction with 5 U.S.C. $$ 555(b) and 5 U.S.C. 706(1), --- Plaintiffs do not cite eirther to 5 U.S.C. $$ 555(b) or 706 (1) as a basis or $1331 jurisdiciton. Defendants nevertherless discuss the issure in the event the Court raised it sua spointe in the course of considering possible bases to exercise subject matter jurisdiciton of this case."

How do I oppose this? I will appreciate any advice.

Thanks,
Anndrew
 
Adjudication of 485 without completion of name checks

Annecodotal reports on other forums such as 485 texas and oh-law firm and other web sites indicates that USCIS is adjudicating 485s if they have been pending for FBI name checks over 6 months. You can collect information on this to build up your case. Additionally you will need to quote USCIS ombudsman's report where in he did not see any benefits of long drawn out name checks. I see it as trawling the sea bed for fishes while destroying all marine life in the process. Less than 1% or so of cases are found to be problematic out of the 339k or so pending name checks.

Reference file checks were ordered by USCIS. FBI has continued to want only "Main file" checks most of which can be completed in 48 hours. So USCIS is the culprit here not FBI, who get paid $9 per Name check. Moreovere there is no statutory requirement or law that requires all USCIS mandated security check to be completed regardless of time, before which immigration benefit can be awarded. Mr. Khatri (USCIS Ombudsman) sees no benefit to national security from long drawn out FBI name checks and wants that to be dropped. FBI spokesman too (Mr. Miller) was quoted in asking for a different approach (main file checks only). All of this should strengthen your case, particularly for 485 cases. In fact some of you might already be allocated a Visa in the month of June.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
AGC4ME said:
Does anyone here have access to Black's law dictionary. Would it be available in the local library. I want to look up how it defines act.
Click to expand...

I went to Borders to check Black's law dictionary. Easy and free. They had two copies on a shelf. Just take a notebook and a pen with you to write down the definition.
 
andrew_sun said:
Dear all,
I received MTD Monday, for my I-485 WOM filed May 29. Here is one point raised by AUSA:
"IN the event the Court determines that it has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. $1331 in conjunction with 5 U.S.C. $$ 555(b) and 5 U.S.C. 706(1), --- Plaintiffs do not cite eirther to 5 U.S.C. $$ 555(b) or 706 (1) as a basis or $1331 jurisdiciton. Defendants nevertherless discuss the issure in the event the Court raised it sua spointe in the course of considering possible bases to exercise subject matter jurisdiciton of this case."

How do I oppose this? I will appreciate any advice.

Thanks,
Anndrew
Click to expand...

Check the document attached to this post:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1715612&postcount=11838

See the last argument - 28 USC 1331 and APA. The district court just cannot reject a complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when 8 USC 1331 and 5 USC 555,702,706 are being used.
 
I did file an opposition to MTD. Since that the waiting has now been close to 3 months. The experience now is now nothing but depressed. Looking back, I think I really should hire a lawyer to represent myself. Best of luck with all of you!

Bou said:
Have you filed opposition to MTD? At least based on the info on this forum, most cases got approved after NC cleared. As for the ruling of OPP to MTD, the judge can take whatever amount of time s/he feels necessary. My OPP to MTD was filed 2.5 months ago, still waiting, I read another member of this forum also waiting after 2-3 months of MTD. Frustrating!
Click to expand...
 
I did file an opposition to MTD. It has been close to 3 months since that. I suffer a lot from the waiting on the mental side. looking back, I should've hired an attorney to do all the job for me. The immigration law won't be on our side if we do not do it properly. Good luck to all of us still battlling on the frontfield!

Bou said:
Have you filed opposition to MTD? At least based on the info on this forum, most cases got approved after NC cleared. As for the ruling of OPP to MTD, the judge can take whatever amount of time s/he feels necessary. My OPP to MTD was filed 2.5 months ago, still waiting, I read another member of this forum also waiting after 2-3 months of MTD. Frustrating!
Click to expand...
 
AGC4ME said:
Yong Tang judgment is just heaven sent for all recent I485 filers. The judge meticulously discusses the origin of 8.U.S.C 1252 (a)(2)(B)(ii) and why it cannot be used to argue that Attorney General has discretion on the entire process.

http://pacer.mad.uscourts.gov/dc/cgi-bin/recentops.pl?filename=gertner/pdf/tangmtd.pdf
Click to expand...


Just wanted to point out that this case is different from most AOS cases in the sense that in Tang v. Chertoff case, the FBI had completed the name check but USCIS was "unreasonably" delaying adjudication. In most cases the delay is caused by FBI namecheck rather than USCIS delay.
 
GC-Pending said:
Just wanted to point out that this case is different from most AOS cases in the sense that in Tang v. Chertoff case, the FBI had completed the name check but USCIS was "unreasonably" delaying adjudication. In most cases the delay is caused by FBI namecheck rather than USCIS delay.
Click to expand...

huh !!! where did you get that idea. Read the complaint yourself. This is a regular case where FBI was the culprit.
 
i need your help plz

i passes my citizenship test on june 18 and my 652 stated that a decision cannot be made awaiting original file?

can i sue based on ina 1447 b after 120 days and whats the chances that uscis will deny my citizenship just based on retailiation?

by the way my name check has cleared and thats based on what my congress person has foung out?

any help is greatly appreciated.
 
Eduardo Aguirre's address to congress

Here's former head of USCIS' speech at the congress where he states that USCIS is working on implementing the Presidential mandate of clearing backlog and achieve a 6month turnaround for application processing. Where unreasonability of delay is questioned by the Defendants can we use this document to drive home the point that both Congress and President desire a 6 month turnaround ?

You can find it at http://www.uscis.gov/files/testimony/USCIS_Budget_031705.pdf
 
AGC4ME said:
huh !!! where did you get that idea. Read the complaint yourself. This is a regular case where FBI was the culprit.
Click to expand...

AGC4ME is right, Tang only presented FOIPA response that FBI has no records, but there is no reference that his NC was cleared.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top