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

Suzy977 said:
The strength of you case (I'm assuming you have a Writ of Mandamus) consists on:

-The length of the time period elapsed since USCIS was supposed to adjudicate your case.

-The efforts you made to exhaust all the Administrative remedies before you went to court.

At the initial stage I wouldn't worry to much about those exhibits you intend to ad, you can refer to them if the case goes further and you have to file a motion or a rebuttal.

This is my personal opinion, maybe guys recently involved in this kind of litigation have a different view point.
in additon to what Suzy said, any woM case need 3 conditions to convince the court.
1 you hvave a right to the releif you asking(GC, or naturalization)
2 the deffendent owes you aclear non discriminatory duty to perform to act on your case( which they do)
3- no other releieve is available to you, exhust of all the administrative solutions.
now, it is never too late to file any extra exhibits, in fact, a lawyer have told me once, that you should keep some of your best ammunition till the last, so after they write their answer , you have some new to add, just like a poker, you dont reveal your cards all at once, so whatever extra exhibits, or supporting documments you have , you can either file them now, and the Us attorney will be obligated to answer whatever you write, or keep them till after they file their asnwer , then you can bring these supporting documents/exhibits, to dispute their claims, so i think you have nothing to warruy about,
 
pharmboy said:
Hi Guys

After I called the clerk on my case, since I have all my personal information in the exhibits, he suggested me to file a motion to seal docket. So I did. today after I checked my case on pacer, I found that they arranged a motion hearing for me on June 5. Is this normal? I mean, it is just a simple motion for sealing the docket, the judge can just rule without the hearing.
i dont know if the judge have to cinduct a hearing to decide wether or not to ceal your records, but i know that whatever hearing they are scheduling, you receive a letter, indicating the date, and whats it is about, so that what you should look for a not, letter, or something explainging what the hearing is about
 
Thanks for pointing me to the right direction

Mohamed,
thanks a bunch for all those attachments. It really helped. I had an initial 23 page complaint that looked more like a thesis describing sequences of actions rather than causes.

The sample helped me to reformat the complain in less than 3 pages and will help me save on some content as later ammo if USCIS decides to fight.

Also it had the case numbers I wanted to attach in my complaint as well highlighting similar cases and judge's ruling in favor of the Plaintiff.
Thanks once again and keep up the good work.

Thanks to everyone else in this thread who're performing an excellent job of pointing poor folks like me in the right direction.

Thanks
Shon
 
khalafah2000 said:
would congressmen/women letters help as evidence for lawsuit?
Also anybody know a good lawyer in NJ/NY area who has filed lawsuits of this sort before?

Khalafah2000,
You can some cases in page 91 (this thread) where some has been filed by attorneys in NJ (their name & phone numbers are there).

I believe if you can do 1447(b) Pro Se. It is straightforward.

Best Regards
 
My wife's oath ceremony at Boston

Yesterday my wife went for the oath ceremony at JFK Library in Boston. I did accompany her. It was really a nice experience. Infact after getting there I came to know that it is Federal District Judge who administers the oath. Basically while the oath ceremony was going on it was a court in session. Speeches which were made before and after the ceremony did give a picture the district courts are pretty helpful if USCIS is delaying the cases.
 
hi,

i filed my suit on may10th for WOM based on an I130 petition in Norther CA. i have not gotten a response yet.
this forum is great. thanks to publicus, Suzy, pharmboy etc who have given us so much info to do this. congrats to all the people who were successful using this info. i will keep you posted.
 
Question about whom to serve

Hi EveryOne,
I have a question and might be rather silly to ask..However, i'll do so anyway.
My I-485 approval case that I'm fighting for is currently pending at pittsburgh DO. To reduce the extent of USCIS reverting/fighting back, I've decided to not include officer in charge Debra Zamberry in my WOM petition's list of defendants. She being local to me and the court might lead the USCIS to fight back.
Guys, am i thinking in the right direction here ? Physical location of USCIS DO Office from the district court wont be more than 3-4 miles and their attorney basically works out of the same court (at least her official address is the court address). Would it make a difference if i leave her out in my list of potential defendants.

TIA
Shon
 
falcyon said:
Hi EveryOne,
Would it make a difference if i leave her out in my list of potential defendants.

TIA
Shon
I think it's better to include her so that the service center cannot make an argument such as: your local office has been delegated the authority to control all activities within your district.
Emily
 
to Moahammed

mohamedmohamed said:
I think that you have made some good peoint, it will be very dispapointing to spend a lot of time, amoney preparing for you suit, just to find out that it has been dimissed, due to some simple tachicality error, so it very critical to watch that.
if the USCIS didnt want to settel , and try to defend their client, their diffense wont fall too far from the typical arguments they have made on other previous case, which bring us to how important is to familiarize yourself with this argument, and to be able to dispute them , and show the exemples from previous cases, where judges did not get comvinced , and cite against them, that is a strong tool, to show that their diffense is not compeling, like the Dnilove case which have been rejected by multiple courts, so using that against any petitioner, will only show thow week their argument is, and how they are out of any articulated logic way to convince the court.
it is also important to show that whole Name Check delay is not because of information they dont have , or nor able to obtain, but rather is as a result of laziness, because the FBI dont want to take the time to dig in their file , and finish the refrenced check, because it take them longer, and the USCIS, dont wanna pay them, extra for that, because they dont to increase their cost, all that mount to one thing, NEGLIGENCEon their which the reason they dont have any good chance of winning any of these cases.
according to the testimony of the Micheal A Cannonsction cheif of the national name check program section, they can finish any name check, within 24-48 hours, if the USCIS asked them to do so, this is very useful in court, because it show that, their cjhoosing their convenience, befire excuting the duty that was assigned to them by the congress,and leave them deffense less in front of the court, and the good part, ther going to be JUdge examining all these , and it will not be easy to fool him/her, so if they started to bullshit around, and pretend bunsh of nonsense excuses, the court can, and very likely will, rule against them, so the best way to winn your case, wether it is 1447, WOM, is to educate yourself, anticipate, whatever excuse they might come up with , and prepare for a good argument, from the judges analysis of previous cases, i think currently, we have a better chance than 2-3 years ago when there wasnt much cases like these in the federal court aarchives, the is pretty much done for us, we just need to know how use these archive efficiently, by developing a good understanding of the different agles of the issue, so in any argument, you should not pring anything about the name ckeck process, because it is not anything they cant do, it is only something they dont want to do, so what you should say, is just that they delaying your case(naturalization, AOS) willfully, and illigally because that how in fact is, but also be prepared to the FBI name check section testimony to proof thatany name check for anyone can be finished in a matter of days , if the uscis want to.
personally, i dont think i need a lwyer, i am going to look for one, and if and when my cause go to trial, i will very happy to stand , and make argument loud and clear, because i beleive we have all that we need, and nothing better than, or satisfying than been able to make your case for yourself.
and finally , i would like to thank everyone in this board, because of the information we share, and ask and answer, i feel like i can take the DHS in any district court, and i know many other people here can too, so we all should be proud of that, and wil happy when it pays off, and snatch our rights of the people who didnt want to give these rights to us, and delayed our lives for years


Hi mohammed,

Can you please post this testimony of Michael A. Cannon where he mentions that the namecheck can be completed in 24-48 hrs if the USCIS requests the FBI to do so.
 
hadenuf said:
Hi mohammed,

Can you please post this testimony of Michael A. Cannon where he mentions that the namecheck can be completed in 24-48 hrs if the USCIS requests the FBI to do so.
we have been lookinf for specific piece of info(24-48 hours)this for a vhile, we havent found it yet, but the bottom line they can finish whenever the uscis aske them to so.
 
mohamedmohamed said:
we have been lookinf for specific piece of info(24-48 hours)this for a vhile, we havent found it yet, but the bottom line they can finish whenever the uscis aske them to so.

Than you for responding. Is there any material(testimony or other material) that we can use to claim that FBI says that they can complete the name checks if CIS asks them to do so?.

In particular I am looking for the link where the FBI mentioned that they can expedite name chekcs when USCIS asks them do so
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Haddy

I thought you filed a motion to seal docket? Anway, the complaint and the exhibits have a lot of personal info (SSN, DOB, etc) so I filed a motion to seal the docket to so it will not be accessed by public. Is it correct, the Great Mohamed? So did you file in NJ, Haddy?


Haddy said:
OH :eek: When did I file Motion to seal... may be I dont know what this term means... pharmboy what does motion to seal docket means :confused:
 
Thanks for answering , Mohamed. I am a bit nervous on dealing with this, so I want to hear what you guys say. So I guess I will sit tight and wait for the letter from the Court. Even though the motion gets denied, it is no big deal. But I don't see any reason why it could be denied.

mohamedmohamed said:
i dont know if the judge have to cinduct a hearing to decide wether or not to ceal your records, but i know that whatever hearing they are scheduling, you receive a letter, indicating the date, and whats it is about, so that what you should look for a not, letter, or something explainging what the hearing is about
 
hadenuf said:
Than you for responding. Is there any material(testimony or other material) that we can use to claim that FBI says that they can complete the name checks if CIS asks them to do so?.

In particular I am looking for the link where the FBI mentioned that they can expedite name chekcs when USCIS asks them do so

Here it is. Check out paragraph 19 of Cannon Testemony. Also, check out the other document, Page 24. It says that "CIS may pay FBI to expidite a few hundred name checks per month"
 
RealSuperK said:
Here it is. Check out paragraph 19 of Cannon Testemony. Also, check out the other document, Page 24. It says that "CIS may pay FBI to expidite a few hundred name checks per month"

Thanks RealSuperK for the links.
 
bostonians, please help!

I am stuck in Boston. Naturalization interview was in Sept. 2005. Contemplating to sue CIS. Any Bostonian who had experiences can provide me defendants' names and a complaint template? I can be reached at verywang@hotmail.com
 
Amendment to 1447(b)

Hi, i have been following the Senate in debating the Bill 2611 and one of section states that they will amend particularly in Section 336(b) (8 U.S.C 1447(b) to be amended as follows:-

Request for hearing before disctirct court:-
Wherein if there is a failure to render a final administrative decision under Section 335 before the end of 180 days period begining on the date on which the Secretary of Homeland Security completes all examnination and interviews required under such section, the applicant may apply to the district court for the district in which the applicants resides for a hearing on the matter. Such district court shall only have jurisdiction to review the basis for delay and remand the matter, with appropriate instructions to the Secretary for the Secretary's determination on the application.

Note:-
The current legislation provides an avenue for the applicant to determine their matter in the district court but with the changes, applicant could only get thier matter heard in court on why they delay the matter but however, the judge are not allow to determine the case but to send back the case to USCIS. And this amendments shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

I hope anybody can correct me if my interpretation is right or are willing to share their views regarding this amendment and how it affect those who are still waiting for their naturalization application to be adjudicated due to name check problem.

Thanks
 
Haddy said:
OH :eek: When did I file Motion to seal... may be I dont know what this term means... pharmboy what does motion to seal docket means :confused:

Haddy,
It means that no body can access your case documents, for privacy reason.
 
Top