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

z350 said:
..... Even I485 folks can stay and work in this country while process pending...
Click to expand...

That is one level of comfort . But then the discomfort becomes one is stuck at the same job for 5+ years without much promotion. AC21 can be tricky at times. Don't want 5 years waiting go down the drain.

...
But you should understand that primary role of government (USCIS in our case) is to protect people of United States ....
Click to expand...

So it is in their best interests to quickly complete the namecheck.

I am sure most of the cases are sitting in FBI shelf for an agent to look at or to transport some paper files from a field office. A resource issue as stated publicly by FBI at their FAQ page. Otherwise how the long pending namechecks get resolved in weeks following expedited request from USCIS ?
 
I not defending backlog since I'l the one affected. I'm saying that all thise ideas to restore the old track won't going to work since public will ask them - what did you do to prevent another 9-11? They're not brave enoght to accept Ombudsman's conclusion about NC especialy about so called backlog elimination - pure PR action and twisting the numbers. They not even bother to make an an answer that was due early september.:confused:

So you guys basically suggest to revoke citizenship base on NC results? Can you imagine impact?:D

As for promotion I guess you know about 180 days rule in case of EB? I saw quite few such cases in our company.
 
z350 said:
I not defending backlog since I'l the one affected. I'm saying that all thise ideas to restore the old track won't going to work since public will ask them - what did you do to prevent another 9-11? They're not brave enoght to accept Ombudsman's conclusion about NC especialy about so called backlog elimination - pure PR action and twisting the numbers. They not even bother to make an an answer that was due early september.:confused:

So you guys basically suggest to revoke citizenship base on NC results? Can you imagine impact?:D

As for promotion I guess you know about 180 days rule in case of EB? I saw quite few such cases in our company.
Click to expand...

I agree that public will ask them, and yes, what they have in place right now is a pure PR and a typical government project - colossal waste of resources that achieves nothing. If they really want to increase security, than double up the staff at NNCP. How simple is that? Does it require a lot of resources? No. It's a fraction of what is spent in Iraq daily. But what the government has now in place is another 9/11 waiting to happen. What will public say then? A bad guy can enter a country clean, apply for AOS and then do whatever he wants. Four years later FBI clears the guy because the initial search was performed four years ago! It's much more dangerous to have a false sense of security than to know your risks and to face them.
Therefore I tend to agree with OLKO that the whole situation is fishy.
And I see nothing wrong with revoking citizenship or GC if there is a proof of a foul play.
 
lazycis said:
I agree that public will ask them, and yes, what they have in place right now is a pure PR and a typical government project - colossal waste of resources that achieves nothing. If they really want to increase security, than double up the staff at NNCP. How simple is that? Does it require a lot of resources? No. It's a fraction of what is spent in Iraq daily. But what the government has now in place is another 9/11 waiting to happen. What will public say then? A bad guy can enter a country clean, apply for AOS and then do whatever he wants. Four years later FBI clears the guy because the initial search was performed four years ago! It's much more dangerous to have a false sense of security than to know your risks and to face them.
Therefore I tend to agree with OLKO that the whole situation is fishy.
And I see nothing wrong with revoking citizenship or GC if there is a proof of a foul play.
Click to expand...

This is correct. They clearly see that name check victims are not security risks so they prioritize name check completion as the lowest possible priority and when pushed (very rarely) by any one from outside these agencies, they site security threat to shut them up. So though the name check policy itself was was not devised with a discriminatory intent, it is rendering itself as a free gift that wont stop giving to insiders who would like to check immigrant infow and cannot find any legal basis to do so. That is why the courts are the only solution to this situation. The more slower approach is to lobby for changes but this works in a very slow and funny ways. Everybody is aware of the problem but still no consensus on how to fix it. Obama bill that would have fixed this has not even got support to be introduced yet!! Meanwhile legal immigrants suffer and since legal immigrants are notoriously un-united in any cause there is no huge hue and cry to fix the situation. During my case, almost every person I knew that I talked to from my ethenic background refused to belive that this is a general issue instead prefering to belive that it happens to only "others" unlike themselves!!.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To those fighting in the 3rd Circuit

Khan v. Atty. Gen. of U.S., 448 F.3d 226 3rd Cir. May 22, 2006
The case has a good analysis of 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii) appicability based on decisions from other circuits.

In our view, the Second, Fifth, Ninth and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeals have adopted the correct reading of § 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). As we have previously observed, “[t]he key to § 125[2](a)(2)(B)(ii) lies in its requirement that the discretion giving rise to the jurisdictional bar must be ‘specified’ by statute.
In other words, ‘the language of the statute in question must provide the discretionary authority’ before the bar can have any effect.” Soltane, 381 F.3d at 146 (quoting Spencer Enterprises, Inc. v. United States, 345 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2003)).
Indeed, “to specify” means “[t]o state explicitly or in detail,”American Heritage College Dictionary 1307 (3d ed. 1993), and § 1229a(a) states nothing at all about an IJ’s power to grant or deny a continuance."
 
hey guys pls give ur feedback on this???
i just spoked to an attorney listed in aila website..
he said he could charge 5 to 7 grand to do a WOM...
i live in new hampshire.
could you guys pls suggest any lawyers around the area.
thanks in advance.
 
z350 said:
.....So you guys basically suggest to revoke citizenship base on NC results? Can you imagine impact?:D

As for promotion I guess you know about 180 days rule in case of EB? I saw quite few such cases in our company.
Click to expand...

AC21 quite tricky. A software developer can't become a manager/director, i guess.
Revoking citizenship is complex.
 
lazycis said:
If your PD was current at any point during your wait, that's enough.
Click to expand...

Given that one cannot even apply without PD becoming current that means anyone with an I-485 pending for more than 366 days should sue, in addition to WoM and APA also include violation of regulation 103.2(b)(18).
 
AGC4ME said:
Given that one cannot even apply without PD becoming current that means anyone with an I-485 pending for more than 366 days should sue, in addition to WoM and APA also include violation of regulation 103.2(b)(18).
Click to expand...

Good point, my friend.
 
gc_mania said:
AC21 quite tricky. A software developer can't become a manager/director, i guess.
Revoking citizenship is complex.
Click to expand...

Well, Before I got my GC (DV2001) I was on H-1B and was a manager and had a 15 programmers working for me. My company filed EB for me as for Programming Manager which was canceled after I got DV. We have now few other managers who are H1B. As for your fear that if your labor was done for one job title and you got promoted, there must be a way to adjust your process accordingly. I shouldn't be a case at all if I485 started. I don't think your company will have to restart you process. You can be called Lead Programmer instead of programming manager as well to be as close as possible to original job description.
 
chaos !!!

so last week i got a notice for a 2nd time finger print request on my 2 yr pending I-485... the apointment was today... i took half a day off work to go do my finger prints.. I got to the USCIS building and saw 100's of pple b*tching outside... the building was closed today "for maintenance" .... and they had a note on the door asking pple to re-schedule their apointments !!!

VERY NICE !!!!!!
 
tell me about it

I've had an infopass appointment and had the same situation - the building was closed. Nobody called me or e-mailed me to warn about it (why do they ask you to provide phone and e-mail then?). Day off wasted and no apology.
 
lazycis said:
I've had an infopass appointment and had the same situation - the building was closed. Nobody called me or e-mailed me to warn about it (why do they ask you to provide phone and e-mail then?). Day off wasted and no apology.
Click to expand...

yeah this is the 2nd time it happened to me !!

how long did it take them to reschedule u?

i am dying to know if that is a sign that my name check has cleared
 
Maryland Success Rate!

Okay, here is my story!

My N400 has been pending for over 2 years. I came to this site and learned a lot. I was on the verge of filing 1447b but started by writing letters on letters. Finally Name Check cleared in June. I was sent letter to take second set of fingerprints and i took those on Sept 19th. Well, it still says pending background check. They said that they are doing additional checks. What does that mean? Anyone had experience with that? Also, how long after name check is cleared does it take for them to finish additional checks?

Other question. What is the success rate for 1447b filers in Maryland? Does it look worth it to even file 1447b now or does it look like my case is almost over? I cannot file until December but i have already started preparing my case. Any advice will be greatly appreciated. Thank you.:confused:

Also, just to add. I have been told twice that my case is in the hands of the adjudicator. I am so fed up with the lies and confusion i have had from Customer Service, i don't believe anything i hear anymore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Should be no problem filing 1447b in MD as the 4th Circuit court of appeals set a precedent in Etape v Chertoff. If it's not resolved until December, that's the way to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top