springbranch
Registered Users (C)
I guess biggest factor is filing WOM, not sending a letter to MRS. Bush. I did send a letter in April and still waiting.
But either way, congratulations.
Anyone with a lawsuit against USCIS or thinking about a lawsuit (Merged)
- Thread starter Publicus
- Start date
But either way, congratulations.
springbranch
Registered Users (C)
Well, I doubt there is anything to be concerned about. He already said he wants to update the case. Maybe you'll be asked whether or not you stayed in the US after the interview.
Please keep us posted.
Thank you for useful data!
Before this 5th Cir. Walji ruling, I thought this examination=interview logic has finally prevailed, as practically all the cases ruled this way. What's bad about Walji, it opened this arg-t again on a higher level (as I remember, judge said even though he acknowledges the logic under Interview-examination, he refuses to rule because FBI must have as much time as it wants to complete nc.) I still think very soon someone will set record straight again because this is too obnoxious, but until then AUSAs will file more MTDs citing Walji.
The case you quoted proves that it's very difficult to keep a case alive on Appeals' level once they adjudicate. That's too bad! (And it somewhat refers to my post to Nifty).
AGC4ME and kk405,
Unfortunately, the memo I have is also originally from the same source and is relatively bad quality. However, it is readable and being pro se gives us some advantages so I simply submitted that not very good printout as my exhibit. Since it's readable I don't think they have grounds to officially complain and demand to withhold this exhibit. Just print it on a best quality settings and it should work.
Last edited by a moderator:
After filing WOM
My I-485 is pending for more than 3 years and I filed WOM 2 months ago. A conference is scheduled at September. Yesterday i received a letter from USCIS. In the letter, it wrote that my case is currently under review. Is this mean that my name check was clear.
My I-485 is pending for more than 3 years and I filed WOM 2 months ago. A conference is scheduled at September. Yesterday i received a letter from USCIS. In the letter, it wrote that my case is currently under review. Is this mean that my name check was clear.
Me too
Me too. After waiting for 3.75 years. I finally received in May an email asking me for new fingerprints and a reinterview (search for my previous post if you wish). I did the fingerprints and they cleared the same day. I am still waiting for the re-interview letter or hopefully the oath letter. Last thing I heard was that my application is currently under supervisory review! Is it good? Is it bad? I have no clue. I guess after waiting so long, all I can do is sit back and wait some more. Please update us on what happens in your re-interview and I will do the same. I searched this forum for information about t he re-interview thing but there is little information about. I am also wondering whether a re-interview is the same as a second interview or not. I would say not and I argue that after all this delay, they now need to update the N400 application and their records (trips, new kids, new activities, etc). A second interview may mean additional information is needed. I noticed that all those who went through video-taping and lengthy second interview never referred to it as a reinterview. Besides, they all received letters informing them of the video-taping.
All of you out there who went through similar experiences, we would greatly appreciate if you could enlighten us more.
Thank you all
rick1
Me too. After waiting for 3.75 years. I finally received in May an email asking me for new fingerprints and a reinterview (search for my previous post if you wish). I did the fingerprints and they cleared the same day. I am still waiting for the re-interview letter or hopefully the oath letter. Last thing I heard was that my application is currently under supervisory review! Is it good? Is it bad? I have no clue. I guess after waiting so long, all I can do is sit back and wait some more. Please update us on what happens in your re-interview and I will do the same. I searched this forum for information about t he re-interview thing but there is little information about. I am also wondering whether a re-interview is the same as a second interview or not. I would say not and I argue that after all this delay, they now need to update the N400 application and their records (trips, new kids, new activities, etc). A second interview may mean additional information is needed. I noticed that all those who went through video-taping and lengthy second interview never referred to it as a reinterview. Besides, they all received letters informing them of the video-taping.
All of you out there who went through similar experiences, we would greatly appreciate if you could enlighten us more.
Thank you all
rick1
well 120 day remand
is good i went thru the same process......15 days before remand day was going to be up.....i found out thru customer service USCIS has approved and uscis lawyers filed case to dismidd as they had an exhibit copy tht shws m uscis approved my case ....so be patience....u almost their...iam waiting for oath which is in the process of being set up around sept 6th....
....My AUSA quote the Walji ruling
Hi, Womer gurus
Last week, I received a letter from AUSA which seems like an amentment of MTD. (background:
I filed WOM in Feb 2007. The AUSA filed the MTD and I filed the opposition. There is no action from judge.) The letter simply told the judge about the 5th Cir. Walji ruling and asked judge to be aware of this.
Now question: what is the best strategy for me? Should I just file something? If yes, what is the best?
Thanks
Hi, Womer gurus
Last week, I received a letter from AUSA which seems like an amentment of MTD. (background:
I filed WOM in Feb 2007. The AUSA filed the MTD and I filed the opposition. There is no action from judge.) The letter simply told the judge about the 5th Cir. Walji ruling and asked judge to be aware of this.
Now question: what is the best strategy for me? Should I just file something? If yes, what is the best?
Thanks
Need advice...
Brief background: AOS pending for 2 yrs and 9 mos. Filed for WOM in Feb 2007, received MTD last month, filed Response last week, ready to file MSJ this week.
Problem: Interim EAD expires next month, renewal application for EAD pending since January of 2006.
Question: anyway to get EAD expedited so as to continue working while the court/CIS is taking their sweet time?
Brief background: AOS pending for 2 yrs and 9 mos. Filed for WOM in Feb 2007, received MTD last month, filed Response last week, ready to file MSJ this week.
Problem: Interim EAD expires next month, renewal application for EAD pending since January of 2006.
Question: anyway to get EAD expedited so as to continue working while the court/CIS is taking their sweet time?
The class action lawsuit I was referring is Lee v. Gonzales, case# C04-449-RSL (Western District of Washington, Aug. 10, 2005). The citizenship applications of the members of the class action lawsuit were denied based on minor wrongdoings, using the "lack of good moral character" argument. Here is a link of the class action attorney's web page: http://www.ghp-law.net/Lee-vs-Gonzales.html
I don't have anymore a PACER subsription so I could not look up the details of this case. Reading just the final order, I didn't find reference about the new N-652 form which should contain the 120 day warning. Maybe it was in a different lawsuit (i.e., my memory is not as good as used to be) or it was mentioned in some other, previous court document of this case.
Maybe somebody will have the time and patience to go through this case and find the relevant order.
Melbashir,
we have the similar case as well. We wrote letter to Laura Bush in May 2007. My case has been stuck in the name check for past 3 years. Last month I got letter from FBI Name Check program, stating that they are working on our case -request from Laura Bush. Then couple of days back we got letter from FBI again stating in response to Laura Bush that "the case has been finalized and the results have been sent to USCIS."
Does it mean that mine name check has been cleared? did u have the same situation? Also, how lond did it take to receive the Oath Letter after getting that letter from FBI?
You said that it took 2 yrs to clear your name check. Did your fingerprints expired?? did u have to re-do the finger prints.
I have gotten INFOPASS appointment for tomorrow. but wanted to get this info from you to see where we actually stand.
thanks a lot in advance for your reply.
Hi ashlie23;
am sure if FBI told u the the case has been finalized it means a good sign to you and it will be up to CIS to finish your process.
My finger prints expired and I'd to re-do that back in March of 07, if you go to your infopass ask to speak with an officer or a supervisor and show them the letter you got from the FBI.
what I did was calling the officer who did the my interview, I called Chicago DO and asked about that officer ext, I used to call him every week till he took my email address and told me to stop calling and that he would update me if my namecheck cleared, then I got the letter by mail a week before the oath.
good luck
Whoever uses the sample, please be aware of the fact that Laura Bush is married so the correct way is to write "Mrs. Bush" (even though Ms. is permissible).
MTD is denied (AOS case) in New Jersey!
This is the first victory in NJ (I believe), so I think it's a very good sign for the district. I-485 has been pending since Dec, 2004. The judge ordered USCIS to either adjudicate or present a satisfactory reason for the delay.
Xu v Chertoff, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50027 (D.N.J. 2007)
This is the first victory in NJ (I believe), so I think it's a very good sign for the district. I-485 has been pending since Dec, 2004. The judge ordered USCIS to either adjudicate or present a satisfactory reason for the delay.
Xu v Chertoff, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50027 (D.N.J. 2007)
Another interesting piece of reading that sheds more light on name checks.
Among other things, it mentions that USCIS has received 440 lawsuits monthly in the first quarter of 2007, which is twice as much as in the previous quarter. Congratulations on the job well done, fellow members
Among other things, it mentions that USCIS has received 440 lawsuits monthly in the first quarter of 2007, which is twice as much as in the previous quarter. Congratulations on the job well done, fellow members
WOW, this is great news!
This is good for other districts as well. Each favorable ruling, regardless of district/circuit, applies a bit more pressure on USCIS/FBI to do the right thing. Or let's hope that's the case!Awesome! Thanks a lot Lazycis for the good news! I have three questions, two of them related to this, and the other one unrelated:
1- Which district is NJ in? 3rd or 4th? Btw, I "think" there may have been another case in NJ of similar results - can't remember the exact case.
2- Would it be a good idea to submit a supplement in the court, mentioning this most recent case?
3- When you file for an MSJ, how long should you expect the judge to make a ruling? I know it is somewhat shorter than that to an MTD/its response, but what has been others' experience?
1. Do you mean circuit? It's 3rd.
2. If you are in the 3rd circuit, of course, use it.
3. I actually think MSJ ruling may take longer, as it usually involves cross-MSJ and two oppositions/replies. I have no experience though.
Paz,
thank you for the link. What I remember is, the other forum member said, he knows of the case where a plaintiff's attorney used this CIS memo and a blank N-652 form as exhibits in his 1447 complaint. I understood that the case was not a class action. The new N-652 form indeed contains the 120-day warning, as I saw them filed in new complaints. Perhaps the class action doesn't even contain reference to this memorandum as it was dated by Jan 2005. I couldn't find anything else on US Courts Pacer for Lee docs but probably it's because I can't look beyond Jan-06.
Thank you for reply!
Another interesting piece of reading that sheds more light on name checks.
Among other things, it mentions that USCIS has received 440 lawsuits monthly in the first quarter of 2007, which is twice as much as in the previous quarter. Congratulations on the job well done, fellow members
Thank you for posting this report. Can you please post a link to complete document? This is a good doc to use as exhibit in opposing any govern-t exhibit which quotes numbers in nc delays.
Also, a little info re. Lofgren::
Zoe Lofgren is our congresswoman, I wrote to her office re. nc delay and she replied with FBI dates of CIS requests in my husband's case. While preparing for the law suit I spoke to her assistant again. She acted surprised that my husband's nc is still pending but said, that their office can't help us any more and we should file if we are ready. About 2 mo. ago I got a phone call from an automated district phone conference which Lofgren conducted for her constituents. It instructed to address my q-ns to Lofgren, just need to wait for my turn. When my turn came I asked (on the phone) about the nc delay and why is it that law-obiding legal residents like my husband are stuck with no help from our reps while the same reps are busy pushing legislation to ease immigration limits for illegal immigrants. She quickly disconnected me from the speaker phone and just said, this delays are known to her and she'll address it in the next committee meeting. So I wonder if this is how she addressed it
Also-a question to all-what is the relationship between FP request and nc process? Initially, FP precludes nc process, but in our case, when CIS requests FP repeated after a law suit is filed? From combined knowledge of this forum, my understanding is, CIS requests to repeat FP AFTER it has nc results and is ready to adjudicate. Please share your knowledge/thoughts...
Please help with my WOM case
Hi,
I filed Pro Se June 19 and got an order to have joint status report on August 14. Sent an email to the USA and got the following response. Please read and advise what to do. How would you proceed with this and would you use a lawyer for this case?
Thanks!!!
------------------------------------------------------
The email from the USA:
"In advance of the Rule 26(f) conference, attached please find a sample 26(f) Joint Status Report prepared by the government and the plaintiff in a case similar to yours. When we have our 26(f) conference, our purpose will be to generate a Joint Status Report of this type, addressing the issues set forth in the Court's Joint Status Report Order.
The government is likely to take the following positions in your case, similar to those set forth in the sample Joint Status Report: that discovery is not required, but that you are entitled to a copy of your administrative file if you so request; that a mediation and trial are not appropriate; and that the government will likely move to dismiss the case.
As you can see in the sample report, however, you will be free to state different positions to the Court if you wish.
Unfortunately, I do not have any new information as to the status of your application and its processing. If I am given any such information I will disclose it to you as soon as possible.
Thank you,"
P.S., see attached sample joint status report.
Hi,
I filed Pro Se June 19 and got an order to have joint status report on August 14. Sent an email to the USA and got the following response. Please read and advise what to do. How would you proceed with this and would you use a lawyer for this case?
Thanks!!!
------------------------------------------------------
The email from the USA:
"In advance of the Rule 26(f) conference, attached please find a sample 26(f) Joint Status Report prepared by the government and the plaintiff in a case similar to yours. When we have our 26(f) conference, our purpose will be to generate a Joint Status Report of this type, addressing the issues set forth in the Court's Joint Status Report Order.
The government is likely to take the following positions in your case, similar to those set forth in the sample Joint Status Report: that discovery is not required, but that you are entitled to a copy of your administrative file if you so request; that a mediation and trial are not appropriate; and that the government will likely move to dismiss the case.
As you can see in the sample report, however, you will be free to state different positions to the Court if you wish.
Unfortunately, I do not have any new information as to the status of your application and its processing. If I am given any such information I will disclose it to you as soon as possible.
Thank you,"
P.S., see attached sample joint status report.