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

kcguy2004 said:
Hi Guys,

I was looking at the 1-485 Complaint template. On Pg. 14 I see:

"63. If prevails, Petitioner will seek attorney’s fees and costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”), as amended, 5 U.S.C. § 504 and 28 U.S.C. § 2412."

I'm filing pro se. So should I include this line?

TIA.
:eek:
Click to expand...

If you file pro se you are not entitled to attorney's fee (because you don't have one). However, if you win, you can ask the court to order defendants to reimburse your filing fee and cost of postage (keep the receipts).

So the answer is you should not include that line. Instead, you can include the following more general request:
"In addition, Plaintiff prays for such further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper." With this you leave open the option to ask for the reimbursement of your costs if you win.
 
neright,
when you have the receipt proving that you have waited for the EAD for 90 days, on the 91 day - with that receipt - you go to the nearest USCIS office, make an immediate infopass appointment and receive a temporary EAD on that very day. I say it using my personal experience: I got this temporary EAD I688 form on Jan. 29, and I766 I got by mail dated March 15. And I could have starting working earlier, as on Jan. 29 my application was pending a lot more than 90 days.
 
paz1960 said:
If you file pro se you are not entitled to attorney's fee (because you don't have one). However, if you win, you can ask the court to order defendants to reimburse your filing fee and cost of postage (keep the receipts).

So the answer is you should not include that line. Instead, you can include the following more general request:
"In addition, Plaintiff prays for such further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper." With this you leave open the option to ask for the reimbursement of your costs if you win.
Click to expand...


thanx paz
 
Motion for supplemental evidence

lazycis, paz and others any idea on how this motion should be presented ? Should there be a motion and separate memorandum in support ? LR doesn't say much. clues and hints welcome. And what's the difference between Motion to Exclude and motion to strike. If I want to request the judge to exclude certain exhibits submitted as a declaration should I move a motion to strike or motion to exclude ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I requested USCIS to provide an affidavit on whether they have followed the procedures required by 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18). The AUSA's response was that "a request for production of documents does not require the creation of any new documents, including an affidavit". Since I also requested documents related to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18), AUSA replied in his email "I have checked with USCIS and no documents exist that would be responsive to your request pertaining to reviews under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18)." Can I use this email as evidence in my motions? Is this sufficient to claim that USCIS didn't follow 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18)?
 
I filed a lawsuit as per the instructions from this website. Thanks!!!

Now I have waited 3 weeks but I still have not yet received the green slip from the post office for all defendants in the lawsuit. What are my options? Could I use the "status info" on the US postal office web site + the certified mail to file the 2nd page of the summons form with the court?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
 
AGC4ME said:
lazycis, paz and others any idea on how this motion should be presented ? Should there be a motion and separate memorandum in support ? LR doesn't say much. clues and hints welcome. And what's the difference between Motion to Exclude and motion to strike. If I want to request the judge to exclude certain exhibits submitted as a declaration should I move a motion to strike or motion to exclude ?
Click to expand...

I think you do not need a separate memorandum for motion to leave simply state that you are asking court to allow you to file newly discovered evidence.
I believe you should file a "motion to strike" to exclude certain docs filed by AUSA.
 
MK_Calif said:
I filed a lawsuit as per the instructions from this website. Thanks!!!

Now I have waited 3 weeks but I still have not yet received the green slip from the post office for all defendants in the lawsuit. What are my options? Could I use the "status info" on the US postal office web site + the certified mail to file the 2nd page of the summons form with the court?

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Click to expand...

You can try and if court accepts it, great, if not you just wait for the receipts. Call court clerk to be sure, the procedure varies from court to court.
 
w&w said:
I requested USCIS to provide an affidavit on whether they have followed the procedures required by 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18). The AUSA's response was that "a request for production of documents does not require the creation of any new documents, including an affidavit". Since I also requested documents related to 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18), AUSA replied in his email "I have checked with USCIS and no documents exist that would be responsive to your request pertaining to reviews under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18)." Can I use this email as evidence in my motions? Is this sufficient to claim that USCIS didn't follow 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18)?
Click to expand...

Certainly you can use the e-mail as the prove that they did not follow the regs. Did you have rule 26 conference? You can also send a discovery interrogatory and ask them specificaly. I.e:

Interrogatory No. 1:

Were the procedures for withholding adjudications outlined in 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18) followed in regard to the Plaintiff's application?
If yes, on what dates the reviews were conducted and who conducted them?

BTW, requests for production of documents can be combined with interrogatory questions so I do not quite get AUSA position. I am attaching a sample interrogatory request.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
how the priority date retrogression affect WOM cases

Hey, Lazycis,

It looks like the priority date for EB2 for Chinese goes back to 2003 and I submitted my 485 case in 2005. My WOM case is in the process right now. Do you think that the judge will dismiss my case for sure? Or maybe I could still argue and at least get my name check cleared since FBI is one of the defendants? Thanks. I feel like these bastards at USCIS are playing with us, and there is nothing we can do about that.
 
I too have the same question

wommei said:
Hey, Lazycis,

It looks like the priority date for EB2 for Chinese goes back to 2003 and I submitted my 485 case in 2005. My WOM case is in the process right now. Do you think that the judge will dismiss my case for sure? Or maybe I could still argue and at least get my name check cleared since FBI is one of the defendants? Thanks. I feel like these bastards at USCIS are playing with us, and there is nothing we can do about that.
Click to expand...

May be this takes the "sting" out of I-485 based WOM law suits ?
I too retrogressed ( back to Jan 02 ). Good thing that citizenship doesn't have country based quota.
 
wommei said:
Hey, Lazycis,

It looks like the priority date for EB2 for Chinese goes back to 2003 and I submitted my 485 case in 2005. My WOM case is in the process right now. Do you think that the judge will dismiss my case for sure? Or maybe I could still argue and at least get my name check cleared since FBI is one of the defendants? Thanks. I feel like these bastards at USCIS are playing with us, and there is nothing we can do about that.
Click to expand...

AGC4Me is fighting the issue currently. We'll see how it plays out. In any case, you can ask court to compel FBI to complete your name check and USCIS to adjudicate your I-485 as soon as visa number becomes available to you.
 
lazycis and other experts

I filed 1447b on September 19 and certificate of service was dated October 2. I've been watching cases similar to mine on PACER and noticed that in all of them there is an ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE from the assigned judge. My case doesn't have it. Do you know if it is mandatory, or not? I e-mailed the AUSA, and she replied that she did not have any updates on the status of my case. I also talked to the clerk and the court deputy for my judge, but both of them sounded unsure, and told me that different judges have different ways of handling cases. Any input will be appreciated.
 
lazycis said:
I think you do not need a separate memorandum for motion to leave simply state that you are asking court to allow you to file newly discovered evidence.
I believe you should file a "motion to strike" to exclude certain docs filed by AUSA.
Click to expand...

So what's the difference between Strike and Exclude.
 
What should I file now?

Dear Lazycis and other gurus,
Here is my case: WOM was filed in June for pending 485 (nearly 4 years). AUSA filed MTD and I filed opposition in August. Court issued a schedule order in August setting the deadlines for JSR, discovery, dispositive motions, and dates for pretrial and trial in 2008.

I filed a request for document reproduction (using Lazycis’s discovery template) in Oct. I just received an E-mail from AUSA stating she will file “Motion to modify rule 16 scheduling order, or in alternative motion for protective order and supporting brief.” In her draft of the motion, she requests the court to cancel the discovery and dismiss the case for the same reason as the MTD. Or if court declines the MTD, they still don’t want to release any sensitive records.

Now what should I do? File an opposition to this motion or file MSJ? Or just wait the court to rule?

Thanks a lot for your help!
 
You should write an opposition. First, explain why the case should not be dismissed. Second, ask judge to issue order to compel defendants to respond to your discovery request. Explain that you did not ask for any sensitive information (only administrative records) and if such information is part of the documents you requested, the defendants can redact it.
 
for applellants and petitioners

This is an interesting excerpt from a recent opinion by the 6th Circuit in Sarr v. Gonzales, 485 F.3d 354 (6th Cir. 2007)

"...the government does not assert that the petitioner's motion was not both timely and procedurally proper; and the requests made by both the petitioner and his wife for adjustment of status based on their 2002 marriage have been left pending by immigration officials for more than three years, without benefit of review or a hearing. Under these circumstances, it seems to us that the petitioner deserves, at the very least, an opportunity to have his request for discretionary relief considered by agency officials entrusted with the responsibility for making such determinations. Unfortunately for him, it is only those officials who have the necessary authority to grant relief in this case, and not the courts."

http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0140p-06.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top