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

[Feb2005]

Okay- after 3 years of waiting for nc clearance I think I will be filling this WOM thing! But I need help from you guys!!! I've been reading this thread from the begining and got it down the basic parts. Now, I've questions:

Well, I think, I'll be doing pro se thing.

Does anyone know in NYC if there were such cases and how it went? My case is for I-485, and my visa availibility every thing is current (and my dh became citizen in nov last year), .

On the defendants list who should be there? My case was filled and interviewed everything happened in New York, Federal plaza....but they moved my case to California Svcs Center. And when I called recently I was told by someone at Cali svcs center that "it's ready to go and only thing pending is name check"...

They initiated my name check to FBI on 11/30/2004. Interviewd on 02/15/2005...

I'm done with writing Senator Hil Clin...went to Congressman Charles Rang's office...nada from them.

I very recently wrote to L.Bush (pretty sure will get nada from there too) and sent form to Ombudsman (only place I'm hoping might do something).

I'll be waiting at least 2 more weeks before I start this process. So, basically I'm done with exhausting everything including myself...

 

[suethem]

Hi friends,
Since the judge granted the extension time to AUSA, so fa there no movement of my case yet. I am preparing for AUSA's MTD I guess. ~~~> Lazycis, my mandamus is about I-485 adjustment status thru family base. Do you know any good respond MTD in Minnesota?

Good luck to everyone who is filing the WOM.
Thanks.

 

[wom_ri]

need to distinguish diversity visa cases with EB visas or family based visas

Also look at recent case svensborn(attached).
Important points to distinguish:
a) The statute is clear that diversity cases have to obtain visa from the fiscal year that they won the lottery. and their right to a visa runs out at the end of the year. The diversity visa winners are selected in a random order(by statute). For EB and family bases cases, the statute is very clear on the order in which applicants need to be processed.

b)Unlike svensborn.. the primary issue here inordinate delays in adjudicating the I-485 application; no decision has been made yet.. and will not likely be made unless the court intervenes.

c)This is not a typical case of equitable estoppel. Traditional elements of estoppel will not work against govt. (esp. in immigration cases).
To draw conclusions of affirmative misconduct.. look at ombudsmans report_2007.. it states that after inteviewing many adjudicators.. ombudsmans infered that they are interested in the low-hanging fruit..
and grant allocation is proportional to cases adjudicated..
d)for affirmative misconduct look at criteria for withholding applications
as expressed in 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(18) -- USCIS will probably claim that it need not withold cases in cases of FBI delay..
e)look at my earlier post about july visa bulletin and how visa numbers were exhausted by USCIS.
d) cite some actual cases, where similar cases were expedited based on WOM after the 2007 memo. i.e.. outside the published criteria for expediting..The argument here is that expediting namechecks on select WOM cases(esp. without a judge denying MTD) notwithstanding the public memo is serious injustice(if you have an earlier priority date) and a pattern of deliberate lies.
e) Misrepresentation by USCIS also stems from I-485 notice issued to applicants stating that "most of the time your case is pending the processing status will not change because we will be working on others filed earlier".
f) Misrepresentation by USCIS also stems from I-485 notice issued to applicants which states "we will notify you by mail when we make a decision on this case, or if we need something from you". It is very clear that they will process your case(as long as the priority date is current) instead of ignoring your application.
f)Misrepresentation by USCIS can also be put forth since they never appealed a case where MTD was denied.. In all MTD, they argue vehemently that courts lack jurisdiction and plaintiff has not stated a valid claim for mandamus relief.. So.. USCIS agree with them having a duty to adjudicate your application and expedite the namecheck to grant you relief if you are from select judicial district; and to the contrary are happy with judges granting them MTD and continue to unreasonably delay similar petitions.

All though the court rule in favor of the defendant, there some points can be used in our argument.

Paunescu, Kobzev and Przhebelskaya demonstrate the best
means for diversity visa applicants to force the Government to
adjudicate their applications before the fiscal year is out.

 

[walterchen]

Hi, Feb:

I am in the same boat (see my signature), I wrote my congressman, senator, the 1st lady, et. al. to no avail. The best I got was replies from the FBI saying that my NC was pending (duh!). I plan to file WOM now as every other avenue has been closed for me.

Good luck!
Walter

Okay- after 3 years of waiting for nc clearance I think I will be filling this WOM thing! But I need help from you guys!!! I've been reading this thread from the begining and got it down the basic parts. Now, I've questions:

 

[lazycis]

Okay- after 3 years of waiting for nc clearance I think I will be filling this WOM thing! But I need help from you guys!!! I've been reading this thread from the begining and got it down the basic parts. Now, I've questions:

Well, I think, I'll be doing pro se thing.

Does anyone know in NYC if there were such cases and how it went? My case is for I-485, and my visa availibility every thing is current (and my dh became citizen in nov last year), .

On the defendants list who should be there? My case was filled and interviewed everything happened in New York, Federal plaza....but they moved my case to California Svcs Center. And when I called recently I was told by someone at Cali svcs center that "it's ready to go and only thing pending is name check"...

They initiated my name check to FBI on 11/30/2004. Interviewd on 02/15/2005...

I'm done with writing Senator Hil Clin...went to Congressman Charles Rang's office...nada from them.

I very recently wrote to L.Bush (pretty sure will get nada from there too) and sent form to Ombudsman (only place I'm hoping might do something).

I'll be waiting at least 2 more weeks before I start this process. So, basically I'm done with exhausting everything including myself...

Put Mukasey, Gonzalez, Chertoff and Mueller as defendats. That will be enough if you are not affected by retrogression (if you are, then add Rice to the mix )

 

[gc_mania]

"Victim of a crime"

Silly question ?
I believe one could be flagged in FBI name check and so land in their purgatory if one had been a "victim of a crime" . My car was broken into year 2004 and i reported it to police. So, i am victim of a crime. Is that why i am still stuck in name check ?

 

[futureuscitizen]

Second fingerprint on the way

AUSA's office asked me to verify my address so that they can send the second fingerprint appointment. But they told me that my BG is still pending with FBI.....

is that normal.? Because I am seeing people getting Second FP notice after their BG check is done.

 

[walterchen]

I just had my second FP done, and my NC is still pending.

My advice is: don't try to make sense of what USCIS does (I am not saying this with any bitterness, I am past that) -- really, they just do whatever they do with apparently no logic.

Walter

AUSA's office asked me to verify my address so that they can send the second fingerprint appointment. But they told me that my BG is still pending with FBI.....

is that normal.? Because I am seeing people getting Second FP notice after their BG check is done.

 

[MDwatch]

Regardless of the status of your background check, they will send you FP notice every 15 months .... that's just what the manual tells them to do

 

[stat]

Put Mukasey, Gonzalez, Chertoff and Mueller as defendats. That will be enough if you are not affected by retrogression (if you are, then add Rice to the mix )

Lazycis, so we don't have to put our local USCIS Director on the complaint? If so, that will save some postage costs.

 

[Feb2005]

thank you lazycis.

More questions: (sorry i'm going to be a pain for a long time )

My work permit will expire in June. I'll be applying for renewal next month. I was wondering if I should file wom after I get the new work permit as I'm thinking what if they -uscis doesn't renew my permit cause I filled wom (like a revenge.. ) if my permit doesn't get renewed we will be in big trouble as my hubby is not working due to sickness. Anyone thinks they can deny the permit cause I filled the wom??

Also, similar question like pp do I not need to include local director? I really don't care if not but only reason I was thinking was I will send a letter that I'll be filling a wom soon- with a draft of the complaint (read someone did that here)...so, if the local is not included who can I sent that letter to?

thanks!!

 

[lazycis]

Lazycis, so we don't have to put our local USCIS Director on the complaint? If so, that will save some postage costs.

I think it is not necessary. We are suing the government agency, so technically suing USCIS director is enough, we do not have to sue all USCIS employees who touched our application.

 

[waitinfori130]

how do you know what district you are in? my choices of cases in my particular case (I-130) are very limited in the northern georgia district court.

Are there anymore I-130 WOM filers??... I feel so alone and without a lot of sources. I need you guys very much, I feel helpless. USCIS could care less about my life.

 

[futureuscitizen]

Future,
Contact the AUSA asap and try and talk and see what he has. Looks like your Oath is around the corner.

Today was the due date for AUSA to reply to judges notice. And they did file the reply("answer to complaint") around 4 pm.

They admitted /denied so many claims....

Important points from their "deny" part:

-----------------------------------------------------------
In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 2, defendants admit the
allegations contained in the first sentence, admit that defendants have failed to make a decision on the application to date, however, deny that the defendants have failed to make a decision within 120
days after the examination [ But surely they did fail!!!!!]

-------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 11, defendants admit that Form
N-652 was given to Plaintiff and that a decision could not be made after the interview, however,
defendants deny that the interview was successful and state that the interview was not completed on
{interview date} because the background check had not yet been completed. Defendants deny
information sufficient to form a belief as to the remainder of the allegations contained therein. [Its not completed , but was succcessful !!!!!]

-----------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 12, defendants admit the
allegation insofar as it alleges the Plaintiff's naturalization application has remained unadjudicated for
22 months from {interview date}, and deny that the interview was completed or successful.

----------------------------------------------------------------------



In between all these AUSA's office send me an email to verify my current address so that they or USCIS can send my second FP notice (its been more than 15 months after the first one)



---------------------------------------------------------


what should I do now....

 

[lazycis]

Today was the due date for AUSA to reply to judges notice. And they did file the reply("answer to complaint") around 4 pm.

They admitted /denied so many claims....

Important points from their "deny" part:

-----------------------------------------------------------
In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 2, defendants admit the
allegations contained in the first sentence, admit that defendants have failed to make a decision on the application to date, however, deny that the defendants have failed to make a decision within 120
days after the examination [ But surely they did fail!!!!!]

-------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 11, defendants admit that Form
N-652 was given to Plaintiff and that a decision could not be made after the interview, however,
defendants deny that the interview was successful and state that the interview was not completed on
{interview date} because the background check had not yet been completed. Defendants deny
information sufficient to form a belief as to the remainder of the allegations contained therein. [Its not completed , but was succcessful !!!!!]

-----------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 12, defendants admit the
allegation insofar as it alleges the Plaintiff's naturalization application has remained unadjudicated for
22 months from {interview date}, and deny that the interview was completed or successful.

----------------------------------------------------------------------



In between all these AUSA's office send me an email to verify my current address so that they or USCIS can send my second FP notice (its been more than 15 months after the first one)



---------------------------------------------------------


what should I do now....

You should file a motion for summary judgment. You are in Texas, right?

 

[lotechguy]

Today was the due date for AUSA to reply to judges notice. And they did file the reply("answer to complaint") around 4 pm.

They admitted /denied so many claims....

Important points from their "deny" part:

-----------------------------------------------------------
In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 2, defendants admit the
allegations contained in the first sentence, admit that defendants have failed to make a decision on the application to date, however, deny that the defendants have failed to make a decision within 120
days after the examination [ But surely they did fail!!!!!]

-------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 11, defendants admit that Form
N-652 was given to Plaintiff and that a decision could not be made after the interview, however,
defendants deny that the interview was successful and state that the interview was not completed on
{interview date} because the background check had not yet been completed. Defendants deny
information sufficient to form a belief as to the remainder of the allegations contained therein. [Its not completed , but was succcessful !!!!!]

-----------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the allegations contained in Paragraph 12, defendants admit the
allegation insofar as it alleges the Plaintiff's naturalization application has remained unadjudicated for
22 months from {interview date}, and deny that the interview was completed or successful.

----------------------------------------------------------------------



In between all these AUSA's office send me an email to verify my current address so that they or USCIS can send my second FP notice (its been more than 15 months after the first one)



---------------------------------------------------------



what should I do now....

Looks like they are working on your case. If you want to give them time to complete your case and avoid a court appearance because maybe the case may be solved without going in front of a judge, just ask the AUSA to joint filing of a motion to hold proceedings in abeyance. Smething like this:

JOINT MOTION TO HOLD CASE PROCEEDINGS IN ABEYANCE

The defendants this matter are working to complete plaintiff’s background checks for adjudication of the plaintiffs application for naturalization. USCIS has indicated that Plaintiff’s fingerprints have expired and the plaintiff has to be re-finger printed again and an appointment is being set up for the plaintiff to give his fingerprints at a USCIS application support center, so that his background checks can proceed to completion. Consequently all parties in this matter request that all proceedings in this case be held in abeyance for 30 days till XXX 01/2008 to allow defendants time to work on the case and adjudicate the application to completion.

LazyCis, Paz other experts, what do you think of this ? I saw this being filed in a couple of cases, cant find the case number now.

 

[suethem]

waitingfori130
your district is Northern District of Geogia ~~~> www.gand.uscourts.gov
My wom is waiting for answer from AUSA in Minnesota. Both of my I-130 and I-485 stuck with CIS for 2 years so far. Could you tell more about your case? Why do you want to file wom just for I-130???

 

[rp1234]

Pro Se Case mgmt conference

Has anyone of the Pro Se plaintiffs attended a case mgmt conference? Curious as to what to expect and what should I be prepared with. AUSA and I filed the joint case mgmt statement.

 

[futureuscitizen]

Looks like they are working on your case. If you want to give them time to complete your case and avoid a court appearance because maybe the case may be solved without going in front of a judge, just ask the AUSA to joint filing of a motion to hold proceedings in abeyance. Smething like this:

JOINT MOTION TO HOLD CASE PROCEEDINGS IN ABEYANCE

The defendants this matter are working to complete plaintiff’s background checks for adjudication of the plaintiffs application for naturalization. USCIS has indicated that Plaintiff’s fingerprints have expired and the plaintiff has to be re-finger printed again and an appointment is being set up for the plaintiff to give his fingerprints at a USCIS application support center, so that his background checks can proceed to completion. Consequently all parties in this matter request that all proceedings in this case be held in abeyance for 30 days till XXX 01/2008 to allow defendants time to work on the case and adjudicate the application to completion.

LazyCis, Paz other experts, what do you think of this ? I saw this being filed in a couple of cases, cant find the case number now.

I just asked the court clerk about the hearing date. She said the judge is going to decide about my case, based on all the papers filed by both parties. So there will not be any oral argument, so that I do not need to appear in court. So all I need to do is patiently wait till that date. Thats a good news. crossing my fingers

 

[lazycis]

I just asked the court clerk about the hearing date. She said the judge is going to decide about my case, based on all the papers filed by both parties. So there will not be any oral argument, so that I do not need to appear in court. So all I need to do is patiently wait till that date. Thats a good news. crossing my fingers

If you are in Texas, I recommend you to file motion for summary judgment and attach the decision from the fifth circuit court of appeals.

http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/06/06-20937-CV1.wpd.pdf

Or at least print the opinion and file it with the court using motion for leave to file a supplemental memorandum.