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

I had a dream

AGC4ME said:
it means that the court has analyzed what effect 8 U.S.C. 1252 has on such complaints. Govt. claims that this statute strips the court of all jurisdiction and the judge has analyzed the statute and clearly states why it doesn't strip the court of jurisdiction. Also read the Dong judgment that lazycis has posted. Another excellent judgment. These judges actually inspire me to take up law profession :-0)
Click to expand...

I think I've came up with another argument to show that 8 usc 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) is not applicable to AOS cases:

AUSA often argues that 1252 bars jurisdiction because the pace of adjudication is discretionary.
Later on, AUSA often says that the court cannot compel the USCIS to make a decision within a particular timeframe because the INA does not specify any timeframe to process I-485.
Thus, AUSA implicitly admits that the pace of adjudication is NOT SPECIFIED in the INA (and it does not specify that the pace is in the USCIS discretion).
This is contradictory to the first argument. Therefore, 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) is not applicable.

P.S. The cons of becoming an attorney is that you will have to defend bad guys from time to time...
 
lazycis said:
I think I've came up with another argument to show that 8 usc 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) is not applicable to AOS cases:

AUSA often argues that 1252 bars jurisdiction because the pace of adjudication is discretionary.
Later on, AUSA often says that the court cannot compel the USCIS to make a decision within a particular timeframe because the INA does not specify any timeframe to process I-485.
Thus, AUSA implicitly admits that the pace of adjudication is NOT SPECIFIED in the INA (and it does not specify that the pace is in the USCIS discretion).
This is contradictory to the first argument. Therefore, 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) is not applicable.

P.S. The cons of becoming an attorney is that you will have to defend bad guys from time to time...
Click to expand...

Great thought. I included it in my future Opp. to MTD if the AUSA files one.
 
amended complaint

Hi,
I filed WOM on Aug 29. I later opened a Pacer acc and reviewed many WOM cases. I realized the following errors in my WOM:
1. Missed AUSA as defendant on my complaint(Even though a copy of my summons was sent to AUSA). Missed AUSA on cover sheet
2. On cover sheet I have, 28USC 1361,1331. I would like to add 2201,2202,702 et seq., 704.
3. On sept 10th, I took info pass for my spouse and we found that her name check is cleared(they did not tell when). I would like to add that info.
4. On Sep 6, I got reply letter for my service_request(background checks are pending)

I would like to file an amended_complaint as per Rules 15(a) of FRCP.
If I understand right, I have 20 days to file this(days start counting from 29th Aug, when I sent out the summons to the defendants).
Would the amended complaint have an adverse affect on my WOM ?
 
No

Amended complaint will not have any effect on WoM. I amended my complaint twice. Just make sure you title your complaint as FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT, SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT and so on. Also your amended complaint completely replaces your original complaint. So you'll have to inlcude all the details from your original complaint in your amended complaint not just incrementive points. Also read your local rules for further details.
 
Bush nominates ex-judge Mukasey to replace Gonzales

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush announced Monday that he is nominating a former federal judge, Michael Mukasey, as attorney general. If confirmed by the Senate, Mukasey will replace Alberto Gonzales.

Mukasey, 66, was nominated to the bench in 1987 by President Reagan and, until September 2006, was chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York -- a high-profile federal court that's one of the nation's busiest.

CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin called Mukasey "an extraordinary difference from John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales," the president's first two attorneys general.

"Mukasey comes out of a New York moderate tradition that goes back to Thomas Dewey; Lawrence Walsh, Iran-Contra prosecutor; Robert Fiske, first independent counsel in the Whitewater case," Toobin said. "These are all sort of moderate Republicans, not especially political people."

While on the bench, Mukasey oversaw the 1995 trial of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and other suspects who were found guilty of plotting to blow up several New York landmarks, including the United Nations, the George Washington Bridge and the Holland and Lincoln tunnels.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, praised Bush for choosing a nominee who is not "another partisan administration insider."

Reid said Mukasey seems like someone who "knows how to say no to the president when he oversteps the Constitution."

While his politics and record should help Mukasey get through the Senate, some conservatives said they aren't satisfied.

"When it comes to other issues, particularly the issue of abortion we do not think his record is someone that we can trust, and we think the president should look at some other candidates," said Brian Burch, president of Fidelis, which bills itself as a Catholic-based advocacy organization "defending life, faith and family."

Bruce Fein, a former deputy attorney general in the Reagan administration, said Mukasey is "not the right person for the job."

"I do not believe, despite certainly substantial credentials, that he has the national stature and strength in Congress to resist White House overtures to insist that he bend the law to assist the political agenda," said Fein, a constitutional and international lawyer with Bruce Fein & Associates and the Lichfield Group.

But the American Center for Law and Justice, a leading conservative advocacy group founded by Pat Robertson, called Mukasey's nomination "good for the Department of Justice and good for America."

Gonzales, a longtime Bush confidant whose 18-month tenure was beset with controversy, is scheduled to leave office Monday. Solicitor General Paul Clement, the Justice Department's No. 3 official, is acting attorney general until a successor is confirmed.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/17/gonzales.mukasey/index.html
read more
 
2 nd IBIS cleared

Could anybody tell me why my second IBIS was done?

I had one IBIS cleared Aug 9, 2005 (just one day before interview).
And another June 20, 2007 (one day before AUSA released MTD)

I did FP's 3 times (May 2003, September 2004, and January 2006)- each 15 month apart.
Since January 2006 no any FPs for 20 month.

Any guesses?
My case is pending since April 2003 (4.5 years)

I ve heard USCIS stopped frequent FPs.
 
CFR (Codes of Federal Regulations) on the web

If anybody wants to read CFRs, I believe I found a good place (better than law.cornell.edu proposed before)

I spent about an hour to get to what I searched ( Title 8 CFR 103.2(b)(18). Now I figured it out and it can be done in seconds

1. Go to http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/
2. Choose Title from the drop down (center of page)
for this example it is Title 8 (aliens and Nationality) Glick "Go"
3. Choose Parts (there are 1-507 parts for DHS) -click on it
4. Scroll to Sub-Chapter B Part 103 (power Duties and Availability of Records). Click on Table of Content 103.1-103.37(second raw)
5. Click on 103.2 (§ 103.2 Applications, petitions, and other documents)

Scroll it to (18). Here is text (as example)
(18) Withholding adjudication. A district director may authorize withholding adjudication of a visa petition or other application if the district director determines that an investigation has been undertaken involving a matter relating to eligibility or the exercise of discretion, where applicable, in connection with the application or petition, and that the disclosure of information to the applicant or petitioner in connection with the adjudication of the application or petition would prejudice the ongoing investigation. If an investigation has been undertaken and has not been completed within one year of its inception, the district director shall review the matter and determine whether adjudication of the petition or application should be held in abeyance for six months or until the investigation is completed, whichever comes sooner. If, after six months of the district director's determination, the investigation has not been completed, the matter shall be reviewed again by the district director and, if he/she concludes that more time is needed to complete the investigation, adjudication may be held in abeyance for up to another six months. If the investigation is not completed at the end of that time, the matter shall be referred to the regional commissioner, who may authorize that adjudication be held in abeyance for another six months. Thereafter, if the Associate Commissioner, Examinations, with the concurrence of the Associate Commissioner, Enforcement, determines it is necessary to continue to withhold adjudication pending completion of the investigation, he/she shall review that determination every six months.

The Notes at the bottom give some history of each document.

By the way, the search engine on this website never gave me the required.
I had to go manually. Had problem with that on gpoaccess.org.
Trick is to go to ecfr.gpoassess.gov.

It seems this website has all updates or links to them.
It is amazing how many documents regulate DHS.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OLKO said:
Could anybody tell me why my second IBIS was done?

I had one IBIS cleared Aug 9, 2005 (just one day before interview).
And another June 20, 2007 (one day before AUSA released MTD)

I did FP's 3 times (May 2003, September 2004, and January 2006)- each 15 month apart.
Since January 2006 no any FPs for 20 month.

Any guesses?
My case is pending since April 2003 (4.5 years)

I ve heard USCIS stopped frequent FPs.
Click to expand...

How did you know that they conducted two IBIS checks on you ? is IBIS the same as name check ?
 
AGC4ME said:
How did you know that they conducted two IBIS checks on you ? is IBIS the same as name check ?
Click to expand...

Mr Greg Collett (USCIS District Director of Baltimore Office) wrote it in his testimony about my case. It does not seem that he made IBIS=NNCP checks
but he never stated anything about NNCP except FPs and IBIS (?)

He stated that (verbatim)

(14) "Petitioner's preliminary IBIS checks have been completed. IBIS checks were initiated on the applicant and responses received on or around August 9, 2005 and June 20, 2007. Remaining IBIS checks are performed at the time of final adjudication if needed"
(15) Upon analysis of these results of these security checks, USCIS will continue to review Plaintiff's Application and complete its adjudication as expeditiosly as possible.
[Decalration of truth; End]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OLKO said:
Mr Greg Collett (USCIS District Director of Baltimore Office) wrote it in his testimony about my case. It does not seem that he made IBIS=NNCP checks
but he never stated anything about NNCP except FPs and IBIS (?)

He stated that (verbatim)

(14) "Petitioner's preliminary IBIS checks have been completed. IBIS checks were initiated on the applicant and responses received on or around August 9, 2005 and June 20, 2007. Remaining IBIS checks are performed at the time of final adjudication if needed"
(15) Upon analysis of these results of these security checks, USCIS will continue to review Plaintiff's Application and complete its adjudication as expeditiosly as possible.
[Decalration of truth; End]
Click to expand...


IBIS checks are valid for 60 days (or 90 ?) and have to be periodiacally done every 3 months until final adjudication. This is one of the things that ombudsman report points out as unnessary repetitive check need to be done just becaus eof name check delays.
 
Hi guys, I have some questions regarding my WOM. I've filed my WOM & received the case number & summons on 9/06/07. I sent the summons to all defendants (Chertoff, Emilio T Gonzales, Robert Muller & Evangelia Klapakis - Philadelphia USCIS office director) I also sent another summons to Philadelphia US Attorney.
I've sent them all by USPS Certified Mail return receipt required.

Guess what, I've received the return receipt only for 2 of them. They're the one that I send for the defendants in Philadelphia (USCIS Philly office, Philly US Attorney) I haven't received any return receipt for those in Washington DC. I've traced on the internet, it showed that it has been delivered on 9/10/07. It sucks that USPS failed to deliver my return receipts.

I received 'Entry of Appearance' from Philadelphia US Attorney on 9/12/07. I filed the return receipts that I have and printing from USPS tracking showing that summons delivered.

I just wondered will there be any problem not having a return receipt for those defendants in Washington DC?
Should I send another summons using certified mail?
If I don't need to send another summons, What's the next step? If I'm not mistaken, I have to wait for 60 days for US Attorney reply for this case. Am I correct or is there anything else I should do at this point?
 
RYCeT

You can print out the USPS webpage and use it to as receipt for other summons. USPS takes about a month to get all the receipts back.
 
second finger print

AGC4ME said:
Not exactly. did you give your fingerprints 15 months ago ? if so this is routine.
Click to expand...

Thanks Lenaf and AGC4ME, I am in chicago. The first finger print I did is actually on December of 2003, almost 4 years ago. I files WOM on June this year, I just had a status hearing yesterday, and US attorney said he will file motion to dismiss. I am just wondering if this second finger print has anything to do with the WOM case I filed. Is it triggered by something?
 
RYCeT

The receipt from AUSA is the most important. 60 day count starts from that day. Eventually you'll get other receipts aor you can use USPS printouts if the court accepts them. AUSA have to respond in 60 days. Be prepared to wait 60 days and you can work on opposition to motion to dismiss/Motion for summary judgment in the meantime.
 
I filed 485 under EB2 catergory on September 2005 and visa number become available from June 2007. Do I need to say something about visa bulletin and when the visa number become available in the complaint for WOM?
Do I have to go to the clerk for dropping off the papers or I can mail the complaint and summons to the court? Thanks much.
 
Fifo

I wonder why none of the WOM cases can claim the following for employment based 485's:
1. How can someone with a priority date May 2007, get his GC(bcos the security checks came out soon).. when someone else with priority date May 2000 is still languishing in FBI files.
ie.. how can USCIS adjudicate on applications that seem to jump the priority date format that they have established for everything else ?

2. Is it possible for someone to get a hold of FBI reports(based on FOIPA) if FBI took 2+ years to complete the background check. esp. if it turned out to be OK :)
we can then establish that these guys do a miserable job of doing background checks..
 
vicky2006 said:
Thanks Lenaf and AGC4ME, I am in chicago. The first finger print I did is actually on December of 2003, almost 4 years ago. I files WOM on June this year, I just had a status hearing yesterday, and US attorney said he will file motion to dismiss. I am just wondering if this second finger print has anything to do with the WOM case I filed. Is it triggered by something?
Click to expand...

Why the US Attorney want to file a MTD? Did he tell you the reason? did you agree with with? I think, your WOM as something to do with the fingerprint. When you file WOM now and your case start to move, US Attorney tend to pretend that they have nothing to do with it. because if they agree to have something to do with it, you can request filling fees and more once your case is solve. But if they do not agree to have something to do with it, it will be difficult to get somthing out off them and they can tell the judge that the case just process without their intervention. On my case, the US Attorney never agreed to have contacted USCIS but she knews that my background check was completed and my petition will be provess soon. How can she know that without interacting with USCIS. Do not agree to MTD.
Thanks!
 
wommei said:
I filed 485 under EB2 catergory on September 2005 and visa number become available from June 2007. Do I need to say something about visa bulletin and when the visa number become available in the complaint for WOM?
Do I have to go to the clerk for dropping off the papers or I can mail the complaint and summons to the court? Thanks much.
Click to expand...

Do not mention visa numbers, that info is changing every month and is not relevant to the case. Yes, you can mail everything to the clerk (do not forget to include check). They will mail summons back to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top