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

EAD delay beyond 90 days. Writ of habeas corpus

Dear friends,
I think my last posting on this forum was sometime in December 2007, when I informed you that I wen to the oath ceremony and got naturalized as a U.S. citizen. At the same time, I filed for AOS for my wife. Due to the bad experience with USCIS, I closely followed up with USCIS on my wife's pending AOS. At about day#80 of filing AOS, we went for infopass, since my wife did not receive her EAD card. The IO told us that her EAD application was pending due to background checks, and that is why she han't been issue the EAD card. She also said the rules about the interim EAD have changed and USCIS will not issue interim EAD. I was so so so so so much pissed off, and decided to file a lawsuit (8CFR 274a.13(d) requires USCIS to issue EAD/interim EAD within 90 days of filing). On day #93, went for infopass again to confirm if they were not issuing an EAD. It turned out that same day, they sent an email that "card production ordered".
So, OK. No lawsuit. But here is the info that I gathered for this purpose. It seems USCIS is delaying/not issuing EAD cards since mid 2007 (see attached USCIS memo). If you are one of the unlucky ones, you may lose your job due to this, since this is affecting EAD renewals also. Also attached is a writ of habeas corpus (yep, can't file writ of mandamus here) to compel USCIS to issue the EAD.
Good luck folks. And I hope no one falls into this pit.
 
habeas corpus?

28 USC 2241
(c) The writ of habeas corpus shall not extend to a prisoner unless—
(1) He is in custody under or by color of the authority of the United States or is committed for trial before some court thereof; or
(2) He is in custody for an act done or omitted in pursuance of an Act of Congress, or an order, process, judgment or decree of a court or judge of the United States; or
(3) He is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States; or
(4) He, being a citizen of a foreign state and domiciled therein is in custody for an act done or omitted under any alleged right, title, authority, privilege, protection, or exemption claimed under the commission, order or sanction of any foreign state, or under color thereof, the validity and effect of which depend upon the law of nations; or
(5) It is necessary to bring him into court to testify or for trial.


A simple mandamus would be more effective, IMHO, in EAD delay case
 
habeas corpus

Hey lazycis,
Good to see that you have been consistently around. And as always, I think you right. You are my guru after all. It seems the mandamus is the right thing to do. I was never sure if we could use habeas corpus, as I knew it was used for prisoners. But then I saw the following in the complaint.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3. Respondents’ refusal to provide Ms. Carreon with an EAD until 90 days after they receive allegedly missing “initial documents” places significant restrictions on her liberty not shared by thepopulace at large, within the meaning of Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236, 240 (1963).
So it seems this attorney used writ of habeas corpus due to this "restrictions on her liberty" thing, which she may think to be considered as impronment:)
But I think if I would do it, I would use writ of mandamus as you pointed out, since in this case, more than 90 days would be considered excessive delay.
 
hi, Lazycis and other gurus,

Do you have any example as how 5. USC 501 et seq. is used in WOM case? Is it only for recovering attorney fees and other cost?

Thanks much!
 
mt100 said:
Hey lazycis,
Good to see that you have been consistently around. And as always, I think you right. You are my guru after all. It seems the mandamus is the right thing to do. I was never sure if we could use habeas corpus, as I knew it was used for prisoners. But then I saw the following in the complaint.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3. Respondents’ refusal to provide Ms. Carreon with an EAD until 90 days after they receive allegedly missing “initial documents” places significant restrictions on her liberty not shared by thepopulace at large, within the meaning of Jones v. Cunningham, 371 U.S. 236, 240 (1963).
So it seems this attorney used writ of habeas corpus due to this "restrictions on her liberty" thing, which she may think to be considered as impronment:)
But I think if I would do it, I would use writ of mandamus as you pointed out, since in this case, more than 90 days would be considered excessive delay.
Click to expand...

Glad to see you back, mt100. The complaint that you prepared for N400 with no interview is very popular these days! I knew it would not be difficult to you to realize that mandamus is the right way to go in EAD cases. I think attorney in that case stretched "habeas corpus" definition a little bit :)
 
meteor8 said:
hi, Lazycis and other gurus,

Do you have any example as how 5. USC 501 et seq. is used in WOM case? Is it only for recovering attorney fees and other cost?

Thanks much!
Click to expand...

http://bibdaily.com/pdfs/Dong 9-6-07.pdf
See page 7 "Non-Discretionary Duty to Process the Applications"

See also attached decision in N400 with no interview case from your district.
"Under the APA, “a person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by
agency action withing the meaning of a relevant statute, is entitled to judicial review thereof.” 5 U.S.C. § 702. The APA
requires agencies to act within a “reasonable time” on matters presented to it. 5 U.S.C. § 555(b). Courts have the authority
to “compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(1). However, the Supreme Court has
“limited that authority to compelling ministerial, nondiscretionary actions-actions the agency is legally required to
take.” Ajmal v. Mueller 2007 WL 2071873 at *2 (E.D. Pa.) citing Norton v. S. Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55, 63
(2004)."

It's interesting that in the order plaintiff's last name is Moretazpour. However the last name is different in pacer (Mortezapour).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lazycis said:
You can file any court paper by mail. More hassle than ECF, but not as bad as going to court in person.
Click to expand...

You are right my friend.

A question.... I sent the copy of my complaint, the stamped summoned with the evidence of service to the AUSA.... did I miss something?

My next move is to send a copy of the complaint and service proof to the court? is that it??
 
Thanks a lot, Lazycia. I will add 5 USC 701 et seq as part of the Civil Statutes under which I am filing. I am also going to cite 'Mortezapour vs. Chertoff' case in my complaint.

lazycis said:
http://bibdaily.com/pdfs/Dong 9-6-07.pdf
See page 7 "Non-Discretionary Duty to Process the Applications"

See also attached decision in N400 with no interview case from your district.
"Under the APA, “a person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by
agency action withing the meaning of a relevant statute, is entitled to judicial review thereof.” 5 U.S.C. § 702. The APA
requires agencies to act within a “reasonable time” on matters presented to it. 5 U.S.C. § 555(b). Courts have the authority
to “compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(1). However, the Supreme Court has
“limited that authority to compelling ministerial, nondiscretionary actions-actions the agency is legally required to
take.” Ajmal v. Mueller 2007 WL 2071873 at *2 (E.D. Pa.) citing Norton v. S. Utah Wilderness Alliance, 542 U.S. 55, 63
(2004)."

It's interesting that in the order plaintiff's last name is Moretazpour. However the last name is different in pacer (Mortezapour).
Click to expand...
 
waitinfori130 said:
You are right my friend.

A question.... I sent the copy of my complaint, the stamped summoned with the evidence of service to the AUSA.... did I miss something?

My next move is to send a copy of the complaint and service proof to the court? is that it??
Click to expand...

I think you have already filed the complaint so there is not need to send one more copy to the court. When you get return receipts from the defendants, staple them to a sheet of paper and file with the court as return of service.
 
farewell

Dear friends,

I just wanted to let you know that I decided to accept an offer from DHS General Counsel Office for a position of legal assistant. I truly enjoyed being a member of this forum for a year or so. It was a magical ride! However my new position requires me to resign from this forum. I know you may be shocked, but I do think the government needs help in its effort to fight the endless wave of immigration-related lawsuits. And last, but not least, the new position has good benefits funded by immigration-related application fees... :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are you serious? Then we have one of our own in high places!!
lazycis said:
Dear friends,

I just wanted to let you know that I decided to accept an offer from DHS General Counsel Office for a position of legal assistant. I truly enjoyed being a member of this form for a year or so. It was a magical ride! However my new position requires me to resign from this forum. I know you may be shocked, but I do think the government needs help in its effort to fight the endless wave of immigration-related lawsuits. And last, but not least, the new position has good benefits funded by immigration-related application fees... :)
Click to expand...
 
Anyone knows if there is any recent success of WOM case for N400 delay in North Texas district? Also, any good lawyer recommendation is appreciated!! Now I firmly believe these SOB would respond to nothing but lawsuit ...
 
Nice April Fool joke ...

lazycis said:
Dear friends,

I just wanted to let you know that I decided to accept an offer from DHS General Counsel Office for a position of legal assistant. I truly enjoyed being a member of this forum for a year or so. It was a magical ride! However my new position requires me to resign from this forum. I know you may be shocked, but I do think the government needs help in its effort to fight the endless wave of immigration-related lawsuits. And last, but not least, the new position has good benefits funded by immigration-related application fees... :)
Click to expand...

Lazycis:

Even if it was not a joke .. I doubt you'd accept a position with a place that you dislike and resent so much.

But it was a good joke though...
 
card production ordered

I have an update in my online status today. Hopefully it is true( I don't want to be April Fool'ed by USCIS).

Current Status: Card production ordered.
On April 1, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you.
-------------------------------
My lawsuit will still be active bcos Iam asking for backdated GC as relief
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wonderful news!! Did you file you preliminary injunction draft that you posted yesterday?
wom_ri said:
I have an update in my online status today. Hopefully it is true( I don't want to be April Fool'ed by USCIS).

Current Status: Card production ordered.
On April 1, 2008, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you.
-------------------------------
My lawsuit will still be active bcos Iam asking for backdated GC as relief
Click to expand...
 
Thanks God; it's not true otherwise it would make this forum orphan. We all know that lazycis is priceless.

OK-Boy


lazycis said:
Dear friends,

I just wanted to let you know that I decided to accept an offer from DHS General Counsel Office for a position of legal assistant. I truly enjoyed being a member of this forum for a year or so. It was a magical ride! However my new position requires me to resign from this forum. I know you may be shocked, but I do think the government needs help in its effort to fight the endless wave of immigration-related lawsuits. And last, but not least, the new position has good benefits funded by immigration-related application fees... :)
Click to expand...
 
Don't accept the offer my friend!!!
USCIS will invoke the 180 day rule of Employment based GC to revoke your hard earned GC based on USCIS new employment offer to you. USCIS will then revoke the labor petition that it will file on your behalf by themselves.

lazycis said:
Dear friends,

I just wanted to let you know that I decided to accept an offer from DHS General Counsel Office for a position of legal assistant. I truly enjoyed being a member of this forum for a year or so. It was a magical ride! However my new position requires me to resign from this forum. I know you may be shocked, but I do think the government needs help in its effort to fight the endless wave of immigration-related lawsuits. And last, but not least, the new position has good benefits funded by immigration-related application fees... :)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top