A memo to reiterate the existing madness ?
Are u saying the blackhole still exists. Idiotic bureaucracies.
Are u saying the blackhole still exists. Idiotic bureaucracies.
Anyone with a lawsuit against USCIS or thinking about a lawsuit (Merged)
- Thread starter Publicus
- Start date
Wait & see
Look like something is in design/drafting phases (A conditional green card, approval letters, welcome letters, etc). May be some special wording for revoking/rescinding of GC if actionable results received from FBI. And if nothing received actionable from FBI, the card holders must apply for "New One" after paying "FEE". USCIS will never loose any chance to put the financial burden on beneficiaries.
USCIS knows better.
180 days memo applies to "NC" pending cases whatever is the reason.
Look like something is in design/drafting phases (A conditional green card, approval letters, welcome letters, etc). May be some special wording for revoking/rescinding of GC if actionable results received from FBI. And if nothing received actionable from FBI, the card holders must apply for "New One" after paying "FEE". USCIS will never loose any chance to put the financial burden on beneficiaries.
USCIS knows better.
I do know a couple cases that were approved after Feb 4th (NC related). One was a pending court case and the name check was a stated reason for the delay.
My understanding is that they cannot issue a conditional GC to employment based GC's without congressional mandate. i.e.. there has to be a statute which can be interpreted to that effect.
Does any know any statutes prescribing revoking of GC's for EB cases ? I have seen such for asylem based cases.
If not.. they cannot create a CFR to that effect..
Does any know any statutes prescribing revoking of GC's for EB cases ? I have seen such for asylem based cases.
If not.. they cannot create a CFR to that effect..
I-485 MTD granted..
ELVIR MUHAREMOVIC, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL JAROMIN, District Director, USCIS, Defendant.
No. 4:07 CV 1427 DDN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DIVISION
2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12514
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), or in the alternative for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Doc. 6.) Plaintiff did not file a response to the motion. The undersigned recommends sustaining the motion for the reasons set forth below.
Because the undersigned Magistrate Judge lacks the full consent of the parties to the exercise of plenary authority under 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c), the undersigned will instruct the clerk to reassign this action to a district judge.
ELVIR MUHAREMOVIC, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL JAROMIN, District Director, USCIS, Defendant.
No. 4:07 CV 1427 DDN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI, EASTERN DIVISION
2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12514
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), or in the alternative for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (Doc. 6.) Plaintiff did not file a response to the motion. The undersigned recommends sustaining the motion for the reasons set forth below.
Because the undersigned Magistrate Judge lacks the full consent of the parties to the exercise of plenary authority under 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c), the undersigned will instruct the clerk to reassign this action to a district judge.
Does USCIS follow the rules?
In the name of NC/BC, USCIS can interpret anything in its own way of business.
Mandamus victory for AOS(I-485) applicant in East. CA
Notable points:
"
Defendants indicate that the delay in this case is caused by the volume of requests received by the FBI and that agency’s apparently unlimited discretion regarding the way in which it conducts requested name checks. Defendants argue that the workload renders their delay reasonable. (Id. at 6-8.) This argument is unpersuasive. See Dong, 513 F. Supp. 2d at 1170-72
(describing conclusory allusions to national security as “something of a red herring,” acknowledging fiscal and administrative burden of processing name checks but rejecting the burden as a basis for relieving defendants of their obligation to fulfil mandatory duties, and finding no merit in argument that court interference will favor applicants who are able to hire attorneys and engage in “line cutting”); Liu, 2007 WL 2433337, at *6 & n.11 (concluding that neither the volume of adjustment applications nor the “mere invocation of national security, without a particular explanation of how it caused delay, is insufficient to justify delay”).
Defendants have not shown that the delay in this case is attributable to plaintiffs, that plaintiffs’ applications are unusually complex, that higher priorities necessitate a delay exceeding four years, or that any efforts have been made to expedite plaintiffs’ applications after so long a delay.
"
Source: http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Shirmohamadali 2-22-08.pdf
Notable points:
"
Defendants indicate that the delay in this case is caused by the volume of requests received by the FBI and that agency’s apparently unlimited discretion regarding the way in which it conducts requested name checks. Defendants argue that the workload renders their delay reasonable. (Id. at 6-8.) This argument is unpersuasive. See Dong, 513 F. Supp. 2d at 1170-72
(describing conclusory allusions to national security as “something of a red herring,” acknowledging fiscal and administrative burden of processing name checks but rejecting the burden as a basis for relieving defendants of their obligation to fulfil mandatory duties, and finding no merit in argument that court interference will favor applicants who are able to hire attorneys and engage in “line cutting”); Liu, 2007 WL 2433337, at *6 & n.11 (concluding that neither the volume of adjustment applications nor the “mere invocation of national security, without a particular explanation of how it caused delay, is insufficient to justify delay”).
Defendants have not shown that the delay in this case is attributable to plaintiffs, that plaintiffs’ applications are unusually complex, that higher priorities necessitate a delay exceeding four years, or that any efforts have been made to expedite plaintiffs’ applications after so long a delay.
"
Source: http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Shirmohamadali 2-22-08.pdf
I485 approved!
This morning I got Email:
I filed WOM in 11/2007. Got MTD but haven't responded because of waiting for the actions on the recent memo. I may contact AUSA to discuss if we can jointly file an extension on the suit. Once I got GC, I may withdraw the suit. What's your thoughts?
Thank you all for your great help!
Thank God for this gift so that a lot of time is saved from being wasted on WOM matters!
This morning I got Email:
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On February 25, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
I called IO on Friday 2/22 and was told NC cleared (don't know when, but as late as 1/2008 it was still pending). IO also told the memo should not apply to me because my NC cleared. My last LUD was on 2/15/2008. The last one before that was 6/2005.Current Status: Card production ordered.
On February 25, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
I filed WOM in 11/2007. Got MTD but haven't responded because of waiting for the actions on the recent memo. I may contact AUSA to discuss if we can jointly file an extension on the suit. Once I got GC, I may withdraw the suit. What's your thoughts?
Thank you all for your great help!
Thank God for this gift so that a lot of time is saved from being wasted on WOM matters!
2nd Interview: Myself & Family
Today, I have received letters for each member of family (Wife, 4 Children) and mine. The interview is scheduled on 3/17/2008 (local office - Newark NJ).
Guys, is this a good sign?
Only my NC was pending since 12-22-2004 (derivatives are all cleared).
Today, I have received letters for each member of family (Wife, 4 Children) and mine. The interview is scheduled on 3/17/2008 (local office - Newark NJ).
Guys, is this a good sign?
Only my NC was pending since 12-22-2004 (derivatives are all cleared).
485 transferred
Hey folks!
Today, my LUD for the 485 was updated for the first time ever (since September of 2004). I received an email saying that my case was transferred to Baltimore! The last LUD for I-130 (marriage-based case) was December 2, 2007.
Given the fact that this is the first "positive" movement (I have never been fingerprinted/interviewed), I am excited! I wanted to ask a few questions:
1. What are the next series of events that would happen (assuming all goes well)? Interview notice? I-130 approval? Fingerprinting notice?
2. In the email it said that they have mailed me something informing of this transfer also, and it would have instructions, etc...would this be an interview notice, or would the Baltimore office send the interview notice separately, on their own?
3. How long do you guys think I should wait before making an InfoPass and going to Baltimore to see what's going on?
Thanks everyone. I hope this is a good sign in this painful journey
Hey folks!
Today, my LUD for the 485 was updated for the first time ever (since September of 2004). I received an email saying that my case was transferred to Baltimore! The last LUD for I-130 (marriage-based case) was December 2, 2007.
Given the fact that this is the first "positive" movement (I have never been fingerprinted/interviewed), I am excited! I wanted to ask a few questions:
1. What are the next series of events that would happen (assuming all goes well)? Interview notice? I-130 approval? Fingerprinting notice?
2. In the email it said that they have mailed me something informing of this transfer also, and it would have instructions, etc...would this be an interview notice, or would the Baltimore office send the interview notice separately, on their own?
3. How long do you guys think I should wait before making an InfoPass and going to Baltimore to see what's going on?
Thanks everyone. I hope this is a good sign in this painful journey
Update on my efforts
1. Response from NSC to my fax request to expedite I-485 pursuant to memo
I received a letter from Director of NSC in response to my request faxed to NSC to expedite my I-485. NSC wrote the response was written the next day after receiving the fax but it took 8 more days for it to be finally mailed out of NSC. According to the letter:
"USCIS is currently working on a process for pending applications past the 180 days pending name check. Once the process is in place all applications will be worked in date order upon receipt. Unless there are issues holding the application(i.e. fingerprints, visa availability etc), the file will not be pulled for processing. It will take time to process these cases and we ask that you be patient. If you haven't heard anything within six months, please contact customer service to complete a service request for status. Expedites will not be taken on this work load."
2. Ombudsman's reply
Standard letter from Ombudsman's office to wait for another 45 days to get a formal response from USCIS. It had Prakash Khatri's signature at the bottom, probably last letter before he resigned! It took them about three weeks to generate this standard response letter.
1. Response from NSC to my fax request to expedite I-485 pursuant to memo
I received a letter from Director of NSC in response to my request faxed to NSC to expedite my I-485. NSC wrote the response was written the next day after receiving the fax but it took 8 more days for it to be finally mailed out of NSC. According to the letter:
"USCIS is currently working on a process for pending applications past the 180 days pending name check. Once the process is in place all applications will be worked in date order upon receipt. Unless there are issues holding the application(i.e. fingerprints, visa availability etc), the file will not be pulled for processing. It will take time to process these cases and we ask that you be patient. If you haven't heard anything within six months, please contact customer service to complete a service request for status. Expedites will not be taken on this work load."
2. Ombudsman's reply
Standard letter from Ombudsman's office to wait for another 45 days to get a formal response from USCIS. It had Prakash Khatri's signature at the bottom, probably last letter before he resigned! It took them about three weeks to generate this standard response letter.
What is the deal with fingerprints ? If finger print expired they won't pull out application for processing ?!
Great News!
Alright folks, I had asked yesterday if there was any thread for those who got approved after the memo; looks like I may be among the first few
Yesterday I had gotten the email about the case being transferred to Baltimore.
At the same time, AUSA filed a letter in court saying that the FBI namechecks have been cleared (wohooooo!) and the file is transfered to Baltimore. If there are "no problems" in the case (don't know what problem they could dig now) then the case should be adjudicated within 30 days!
I think this was filed yesterday...so I am counting now...1 down, 29 more to go
Would the transfer note that has been mailed to me (according to CIS email) have the interview letter in it? Or would Baltimore do it separately?
Alright folks, I had asked yesterday if there was any thread for those who got approved after the memo; looks like I may be among the first few
Yesterday I had gotten the email about the case being transferred to Baltimore.
At the same time, AUSA filed a letter in court saying that the FBI namechecks have been cleared (wohooooo!) and the file is transfered to Baltimore. If there are "no problems" in the case (don't know what problem they could dig now) then the case should be adjudicated within 30 days!
I think this was filed yesterday...so I am counting now...1 down, 29 more to go
Would the transfer note that has been mailed to me (according to CIS email) have the interview letter in it? Or would Baltimore do it separately?
Behind the Naturalization Backlog: Causes, Context and Concerns
An interesting article by MPI:
Behind the Naturalization Backlog: Causes, Context and Concerns
Source:http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/FS21_NaturalizationBacklog_022608.pdf
Courtesy of www.bibdaily.com
An interesting article by MPI:
Behind the Naturalization Backlog: Causes, Context and Concerns
Source:http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/FS21_NaturalizationBacklog_022608.pdf
Courtesy of www.bibdaily.com
I got letter from USCIS yesterday. I am waiting for actual card.
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On February 21, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On February 21, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
patricia_432
Registered Users (C)
Hi Lazycis, others,
I have a WOM filed end of last year. I have had a hearing upon AUSA's MTD on Jan. The judge scheduled a continuious hearing next month. The AUSA said with the new procedure, it would take another 90 days or so to process my I-485. 90 days is too long for me.
I'm thinking, can I file a MSJ attached with the new memo to the Court? Thanks.
I have a WOM filed end of last year. I have had a hearing upon AUSA's MTD on Jan. The judge scheduled a continuious hearing next month. The AUSA said with the new procedure, it would take another 90 days or so to process my I-485. 90 days is too long for me.
I'm thinking, can I file a MSJ attached with the new memo to the Court? Thanks.
Yes, file MSJ to speed things up. With new memo delay more than 180 days is not reasonable.
Apparently this is courtesy of AILA but posted at a different site:
"
USCIS Allows Earlier Inquiries on I-485s Pending Background Check (02-26-2008)
USCIS has announced that after March 30, 2008, inquiries may be made on employment based Adjustment of Status Applications (I-485s) beyond processing times pending background checks.
...
USCIS anticipates that the majority of cases subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008.
"
Source: http://www.lewslaw.com/US_Immigration_Updates.htm#022608a
"
USCIS Allows Earlier Inquiries on I-485s Pending Background Check (02-26-2008)
USCIS has announced that after March 30, 2008, inquiries may be made on employment based Adjustment of Status Applications (I-485s) beyond processing times pending background checks.
...
USCIS anticipates that the majority of cases subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008.
"
Source: http://www.lewslaw.com/US_Immigration_Updates.htm#022608a
AC 21 visa numbers
Are there any decisions that relies on the AC 21 visa number provisions?
Are there any parameters around when these should be used? I am wondering who really is responsible for this visa borrowing? USCIS or the State Dept.
Are there any decisions that relies on the AC 21 visa number provisions?
Are there any parameters around when these should be used? I am wondering who really is responsible for this visa borrowing? USCIS or the State Dept.