You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Anyone with a lawsuit against USCIS or thinking about a lawsuit (Merged)
- Thread starter Publicus
- Start date
thank you for your reply SLOW_CISAs you already know, Eastern district of Michigan is one of the worst ones and your case is the 12th case dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
What you can do is to go to the next step and file the notice of appeal with the district court. You have 60 days starting from the date of judgment (Oct 31st in your case) to file the notice of appeal with the clerk of the court in E.D. Michigan. In about two week, your case will be docketed and be assigned a case number. In about a month, the clerk of the court of appeals sends you the schedule to file your briefs, and you go from there.
My advice to you is to file for appeal only if you are serious about fighting all the way, not just to file it so that they work on your case faster. My impression is that our AUSA is someone who is committed to the fight all the way to the end. He does not request to expedite unless ordered by the court, or he feels threatened that he might loose in the appeal.
After all if you are determined to fight all the way, you can count on me. But remember, I am not nearly as knowledgeable as lazycis.
i am ready to keep pushing but very unfamiliar with the appeal procedure.
what are the fees involved and do we have any reference cases in support ?
it will be great if you can give me some more information.
thank you for your help.
PS: what do you think about the EAD of feb 07 getting updated on oct 28.
I am getting "Electronic access to this document is restricted to registered CM/ECF participants. "
I've read about it in AILF newsletter
http://www.ailf.org/lac/litclearinghouse/litclr_newsletter_120607.pdf
On December 1, 2007, amended federal rules of procedure went into effect that limit public access to electronic court documents. Amended Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) limits remote access to electronic files in immigration and social security cases. The rule states that only "the parties and their attorneys may have remote electronic access to any part of the case file, including the administrative record."
Still, you should be able to access your own case, but it makes Pro Se life much harder.
I've read about it in AILF newsletter
http://www.ailf.org/lac/litclearinghouse/litclr_newsletter_120607.pdf
On December 1, 2007, amended federal rules of procedure went into effect that limit public access to electronic court documents. Amended Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) limits remote access to electronic files in immigration and social security cases. The rule states that only "the parties and their attorneys may have remote electronic access to any part of the case file, including the administrative record."
Still, you should be able to access your own case, but it makes Pro Se life much harder.
about MSJ and Opp to MTD
Lazycis,
Can you tell me what is the main difference between MSJ and Opp to MTD? I know that Judge has to rule on MSJ, but don't have to rule on Opp. to MTD. Other than that, there might be difference in the format and content?
My Judge had been a US attorney in his earlier career, and he likes to postpone these cases. So maybe MSJ is the way to go?
I searched on Pacer and found that the AUSA who handles my case doesn't have much experience either. She only dealt with 2 WOM cases (one of them is mine) and she will write the first MTD for WOM for me. So we are at the same starting point, probably. But I cannot access her previous MTD, that is a down side.
Lazycis,
Can you tell me what is the main difference between MSJ and Opp to MTD? I know that Judge has to rule on MSJ, but don't have to rule on Opp. to MTD. Other than that, there might be difference in the format and content?
My Judge had been a US attorney in his earlier career, and he likes to postpone these cases. So maybe MSJ is the way to go?
I searched on Pacer and found that the AUSA who handles my case doesn't have much experience either. She only dealt with 2 WOM cases (one of them is mine) and she will write the first MTD for WOM for me. So we are at the same starting point, probably. But I cannot access her previous MTD, that is a down side.
I am getting "Electronic access to this document is restricted to registered CM/ECF participants. "
I've read about it in AILF newsletter
http://www.ailf.org/lac/litclearinghouse/litclr_newsletter_120607.pdf
On December 1, 2007, amended federal rules of procedure went into effect that limit public access to electronic court documents. Amended Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2(c) limits remote access to electronic files in immigration and social security cases. The rule states that only "the parties and their attorneys may have remote electronic access to any part of the case file, including the administrative record."
Still, you should be able to access your own case, but it makes Pro Se life much harder.
That's kinda dumb change. I can't access my own case. One has to register to ECF which is restricted to registered attorneys....
Lazycis,
Can you tell me what is the main difference between MSJ and Opp to MTD? I know that Judge has to rule on MSJ, but don't have to rule on Opp. to MTD. Other than that, there might be difference in the format and content?
My Judge had been a US attorney in his earlier career, and he likes to postpone these cases. So maybe MSJ is the way to go?
I searched on Pacer and found that the AUSA who handles my case doesn't have much experience either. She only dealt with 2 WOM cases (one of them is mine) and she will write the first MTD for WOM for me. So we are at the same starting point, probably. But I cannot access her previous MTD, that is a down side.
MSJ and opp to MTD are different. MSJ is requesting that the court declare you as the prevailing party. Opp to MTD is countering the AUSA's argument to dismiss your case. In your MSJ you have to state the facts and show that based on those facts you are the prevailing party. In your Opp to MTD you have to argue why the Court should not dismiss the petition. Typically here you have to prove that the court has jurisdiction, that you have stated a claim and so on.
Having said that there are many arguments that could be common between the two. For example my AUSA in his Reply to MSJ had all the MTD arguments so my reply was similar to Opp to MTD.
That's kinda dumb change. I can't access my own case. One has to register to ECF which is restricted to registered attorneys....
AGC4ME, check with the court clerk on that. I am in Western district of Washington and I was able to register with ECF. I just put Pro Se where the form asks for attorney bar #. It has been a great time saver when I file documents with the court.
Help in MTD response
Lazycis and other members,
My US attorney filed a MTD to my I-485 WOM complaint. Response to MTD is due by 12/31. The pretrial conference was set on 1/30/08. My I-485 application has been delayed for 3 years and 5 months due to the name check. My wife’s name check was cleared in 7 months after the FBI received the request from USCIS, but her derivative application was not adjudicated due to my pending name check. My wife was listed as a co-plaintiff in the complaint according to your suggestions. Now the US attorney argued the defendants have been acting on plaintiffs’ applications and my wife’s claim against FBI director Mueller should be dismissed as moot under Fed R. Civ. Pro. 12(b) (1) because the FBI has completed my wife’s name check. Can you advise how to response to this?
Thank you in advance for your help.
Pengdi
Lazycis and other members,
My US attorney filed a MTD to my I-485 WOM complaint. Response to MTD is due by 12/31. The pretrial conference was set on 1/30/08. My I-485 application has been delayed for 3 years and 5 months due to the name check. My wife’s name check was cleared in 7 months after the FBI received the request from USCIS, but her derivative application was not adjudicated due to my pending name check. My wife was listed as a co-plaintiff in the complaint according to your suggestions. Now the US attorney argued the defendants have been acting on plaintiffs’ applications and my wife’s claim against FBI director Mueller should be dismissed as moot under Fed R. Civ. Pro. 12(b) (1) because the FBI has completed my wife’s name check. Can you advise how to response to this?
Thank you in advance for your help.
Pengdi
nooshinkdd
Registered Users (C)
need info
I applied for citizenship in September 2005. they scheduled interview on April 2006 but before that time they descheduled my interview. I went to immigration office but they told me my application was located at the eastern Service center (Vermont Service Center). I wrote them in April 2006 and they answered me via letter that they are waiting further info from another office. After that I went several times to immigration office but there is no answer yet. I sent letter to congressman and the department of Homeland security wrote to him : the case is currently under review. upon completion of the review the case will be adjudicatd accordingly. I wrote to the first lady but I didn’t receive any answer yet. I send a letter to immigration 3month ago and informed them if they wont clear my case during 2 month I want to sue them. they didnt answer any thing. I filed WOM on November 9,2007 in Eastern District of New York. I have some question:
- what do you think about my case and how is my chance to get my citizenship in this way?
Do you have any info or feedback about the Eastern District of New York?
- What are the processes from now and how much does it take each one?
Thanks a lot for any information
I applied for citizenship in September 2005. they scheduled interview on April 2006 but before that time they descheduled my interview. I went to immigration office but they told me my application was located at the eastern Service center (Vermont Service Center). I wrote them in April 2006 and they answered me via letter that they are waiting further info from another office. After that I went several times to immigration office but there is no answer yet. I sent letter to congressman and the department of Homeland security wrote to him : the case is currently under review. upon completion of the review the case will be adjudicatd accordingly. I wrote to the first lady but I didn’t receive any answer yet. I send a letter to immigration 3month ago and informed them if they wont clear my case during 2 month I want to sue them. they didnt answer any thing. I filed WOM on November 9,2007 in Eastern District of New York. I have some question:
- what do you think about my case and how is my chance to get my citizenship in this way?
Do you have any info or feedback about the Eastern District of New York?
- What are the processes from now and how much does it take each one?
Thanks a lot for any information
Last edited by a moderator:
jamesbrown
Registered Users (C)
Need help,
I have filled AOS application (marriage based) in sep 2006, finger print and interview was done by dec 2006, i had rfe which was completed by feb 2007, after that there has been progress on this case.
I took twice info pass i was told the case has gone to the foriegn embassy. Since feb2007. There has been no reply from them since then. 1800 number just keep opening inqury with standard format.
I just don't know what to do, i contacted two lawyer one say wait and watch, other one say take the case back and refill it. Which dosen't make sense.
I have given them everything to USCIS so why is this much of delay.Can some one help me on this.
I have filled AOS application (marriage based) in sep 2006, finger print and interview was done by dec 2006, i had rfe which was completed by feb 2007, after that there has been progress on this case.
I took twice info pass i was told the case has gone to the foriegn embassy. Since feb2007. There has been no reply from them since then. 1800 number just keep opening inqury with standard format.
I just don't know what to do, i contacted two lawyer one say wait and watch, other one say take the case back and refill it. Which dosen't make sense.
I have given them everything to USCIS so why is this much of delay.Can some one help me on this.
Lazycis and other members,
My US attorney filed a MTD to my I-485 WOM complaint. Response to MTD is due by 12/31. The pretrial conference was set on 1/30/08. My I-485 application has been delayed for 3 years and 5 months due to the name check. My wife’s name check was cleared in 7 months after the FBI received the request from USCIS, but her derivative application was not adjudicated due to my pending name check. My wife was listed as a co-plaintiff in the complaint according to your suggestions. Now the US attorney argued the defendants have been acting on plaintiffs’ applications and my wife’s claim against FBI director Mueller should be dismissed as moot under Fed R. Civ. Pro. 12(b) (1) because the FBI has completed my wife’s name check. Can you advise how to response to this?
Thank you in advance for your help.
Pengdi
Pengdi,
There is no point arguing that. Sometimes you can agree with AUSA. It's OK to dismiss your wife's claim against FBI but you should not give up more that that. Her claim against the USCIS remains standing.
futureuscitizen
Registered Users (C)
defendant's address
These are the list of people I am planning to put as defendants. Please tell me if all the addresses are correct or not. I have a hesitation about the district director's address since all the USCIS stuff is now with DHS and noone picks up the phone if i call the local number. what a way of great service from USCIS.
-----------------------------------------
Michael Mukasey
US Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
Michael Chertoff, Secretary of DHS
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528
Emilio T. Gonzalez , USCIS Director
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Robert S. Mueller, III (Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation)
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001
M. Francis Holmes ---- does this work?
USCIS District Director
130 Delaware Avenue
Buffalo, NY 14202
-------------------------------------------
Thank you
These are the list of people I am planning to put as defendants. Please tell me if all the addresses are correct or not. I have a hesitation about the district director's address since all the USCIS stuff is now with DHS and noone picks up the phone if i call the local number. what a way of great service from USCIS.
-----------------------------------------
Michael Mukasey
US Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
Michael Chertoff, Secretary of DHS
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528
Emilio T. Gonzalez , USCIS Director
Office of the General Counsel
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Robert S. Mueller, III (Director
Federal Bureau of Investigation)
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001
M. Francis Holmes ---- does this work?
USCIS District Director
130 Delaware Avenue
Buffalo, NY 14202
-------------------------------------------
Thank you
thanks, AGC4ME
Thank you for your response, AGC4ME. I started to work on the Opp to MTD although I haven't got the real MTD from the defendants. I think I will have the first version done by the time I get the real MTD.
This is kind of fun--like sometimes I write a paper before experiments because I know exactly what going to happen...
MSJ and opp to MTD are different. MSJ is requesting that the court declare you as the prevailing party. Opp to MTD is countering the AUSA's argument to dismiss your case. In your MSJ you have to state the facts and show that based on those facts you are the prevailing party. In your Opp to MTD you have to argue why the Court should not dismiss the petition. Typically here you have to prove that the court has jurisdiction, that you have stated a claim and so on.
Having said that there are many arguments that could be common between the two. For example my AUSA in his Reply to MSJ had all the MTD arguments so my reply was similar to Opp to MTD.
Thank you for your response, AGC4ME. I started to work on the Opp to MTD although I haven't got the real MTD from the defendants. I think I will have the first version done by the time I get the real MTD.
This is kind of fun--like sometimes I write a paper before experiments because I know exactly what going to happen...
about judge and magistrate judge
By comparing AUSA's reaction to vicky's case and my case, I found that AUSA will usually suggest to go to the magistrate judge if the main judge rule in favor of the plaintiffs. So we need to be very careful about that. If the AUSA ask you to proceed in front of the magistrate judge, you'd better do some research before you say "yes".
But if the main judge rule in favor of the defendants, there is not much you can do. Because AUSA will reject your request of changing to magistrate judge.
By comparing AUSA's reaction to vicky's case and my case, I found that AUSA will usually suggest to go to the magistrate judge if the main judge rule in favor of the plaintiffs. So we need to be very careful about that. If the AUSA ask you to proceed in front of the magistrate judge, you'd better do some research before you say "yes".
But if the main judge rule in favor of the defendants, there is not much you can do. Because AUSA will reject your request of changing to magistrate judge.
futureuscitizen
Registered Users (C)
LOTECHGUY please reply to my email that I sent you
LOTECHGUY please reply to my email that I sent you & your mailbox quota is full in this forum. please check
thanks
future
LOTECHGUY please reply to my email that I sent you & your mailbox quota is full in this forum. please check
thanks
future
Lazycis and other members,
My US attorney filed a MTD to my I-485 WOM complaint. Response to MTD is due by 12/31. The pretrial conference was set on 1/30/08. My I-485 application has been delayed for 3 years and 5 months due to the name check. My wife’s name check was cleared in 7 months after the FBI received the request from USCIS, but her derivative application was not adjudicated due to my pending name check. My wife was listed as a co-plaintiff in the complaint according to your suggestions. Now the US attorney argued the defendants have been acting on plaintiffs’ applications and my wife’s claim against FBI director Mueller should be dismissed as moot under Fed R. Civ. Pro. 12(b) (1) because the FBI has completed my wife’s name check. Can you advise how to response to this?
Thank you in advance for your help.
Pengdi
The following website has quite a few template/examples for MTD and Opp. to MTD. It might be helpful for you to get started on Opp. to MTD.
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FBI_name_check
By the way, which district are you in?
I applied for citizenship in September 2005. they scheduled interview on April 2006 but before that time they descheduled my interview. I filed WOM on November 9,2007 in Eastern District of New York. I have some question:
- what do you think about my case and how is my chance to get my citizenship in this way?
Do you have any info or feedback about the Eastern District of New York?
- What are the processes from now and how much does it take each one?
Thanks a lot for any information
You have a good chance if you stay focused and fight till the end. More likely you will get an oath letter before a judge rules on your case. AUSA answer is due in 60 days from the date you served the complaint. Look for AUSA to request an extension for 45 days (seems to be a practice in NYED). The further process depends on AUSA answer.
These are the list of people I am planning to put as defendants. Please tell me if all the addresses are correct or not. I have a hesitation about the district director's address since all the USCIS stuff is now with DHS and noone picks up the phone if i call the local number. what a way of great service from USCIS.
-----------------------------------------
M. Francis Holmes ---- does this work?
USCIS District Director
130 Delaware Avenue
Buffalo, NY 14202
-------------------------------------------
Thank you
Seems to be the correct name & address for that district (you can add "first floor"). I do not know the phone number as the USCIS does not list phone numbers for district offices. I wonder why.
All other addresses are correct.
about the regulation and statutes
I just found that I used the following as statutes, but I don't really understand them so far. I am a bit suspicious about it since I must have copied it from somewhere. Could lazycis or other member confirm that I used the right statutes? Otherwise, I should file a Complaint amendment before I get MTD. Thanks.
7. Jurisdiction in this case is proper under 28 USC §§ 1391 and 1361, 5 USC §701 et seq., and 28 USC §2201 et seq. Relief is requested pursuant to said statutes.
I just found that I used the following as statutes, but I don't really understand them so far. I am a bit suspicious about it since I must have copied it from somewhere. Could lazycis or other member confirm that I used the right statutes? Otherwise, I should file a Complaint amendment before I get MTD. Thanks.
7. Jurisdiction in this case is proper under 28 USC §§ 1391 and 1361, 5 USC §701 et seq., and 28 USC §2201 et seq. Relief is requested pursuant to said statutes.