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

[shvili]

The breadcrumbs to go about this should be:

1. Is there any over-arching common-sense legal principle, opinion, declaratory judgement that captures this argument ie

If a legal deadline applies to a task of a government monopoly then that deadline propagates implicitly in any agreements that agency makes with other government monopolies for executing dependent subtasks of the original task, for not doing so would render the original deadline meaningless

keywords: monopoly,contracts,legal deadlines,liability,anti-trust

The key of course is wether anti-trust laws apply to government monopolies. most likely they dont

Or a more simple common sense principle:

If a legal deadline applies to a task of a government agency and that agency is unable to meet the deadline it should
demonstrate good faith effort to meet that deadline. In this case means, expediting name check with FBI

I can think of one case where such argument holds: FCRA, fair credit reporting act. If a consumer denies a derogatory item on his credit report FCRA requires that a credit reporting agency should make a decision in 30 days. This deadline "propagates" to all vendors who report items to the credit bureau. If a vendor is unable to complete the verification in 30 days, credit reporting agencies just go ahead and accept the consumer denial and strike the item off his credit report. now one can argue that this is not same as national security but it comes close, ie a person with bankrupties can wipe out all his backrupties of his credit reports if the original agencies that reported the bankrupties do not act to render a decision in 30 days.

Thiis is a great logical argument. What bothers me is, even though the law is clearly on our side we still loose sometimes. This argument would work alone in any simple civil case, but immigrants complains are truly second-rated and to win even in overwhelmingly clear case you may need to show 100 similar cases as your precedents. In a regular civil complaint, you may only need one or with this argument, nothing else.

But even if we don't find anything else, I might use your example. For Credit reporting agency, it's also Fegderal and the example is fair. We just need to google it to get more details on their conractual agreements with clients.

Thank you, Lotechguy!

 

[shvili]

An analogous situation would be like this: Congress mandates that you can drive a car only if you have proper documentation. At the beginning the drivers licence was the only thing required, but at a certain point somebody in the Government had the idea that you can drive a car only if you carry with you besides the drivers licence, your birth certificate, vaccination proof, passport and membership card to the local country club. Oh, and BTW, there is no mandated timeline how soon can you get the country club membership card and without that they can't issue you a drivers licence...

Great analogy! The only difference would be, this would affect everyone and the situation will be resolved in a matter of weeks. I start thinking (based on some members examples-Kefira, Riz, etc) that the law indeed doesn't apply equally to our gorup as it would to a regular citizen bringing complaint to court...

 

[Mingjing]

Pro Se handbook

Can somebody helped find where I can get a softcopy of the Northern California Pro Se Handbook? I tried searching for it in this thread under paz1960's previous postings, but no avail. after 20 min. Thks!

 

[sfbayarea]

here you are

http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/CAND/FAQ.nsf/60126b66e42d004888256d4e007bce29/14de5a2dfcdaa08c88256ebc0054574f/$FILE/ProSeHandbook-Rev4-06a.pdf

Can somebody helped find where I can get a softcopy of the Northern California Pro Se Handbook? I tried searching for it in this thread under paz1960's previous postings, but no avail. after 20 min. Thks!

 

[8970]

the first interview was for I485 ,2nd was for N400

Did you you have two interviews for N400 ? If so when was your first N400 interview and why did they want a second interview ?

I only got the two time interview for immigration

 

[8970]

I only have one time interview for N-400

 

[shvili]

Can somebody helped find where I can get a softcopy of the Northern California Pro Se Handbook? I tried searching for it in this thread under paz1960's previous postings, but no avail. after 20 min. Thks!

Here it is:

 

[bsus]

MTD, Response to Complaint ....

Hi friends,

I have WOM (AOS) filed in Jan 07. The judge issued "Order to Show Cause" and and I got "Defendants' Response to Order to Show Cause" last week. The thing is I do not get a hearing date setup. So I think although what I got has essentially the same content/wordings as those "Motion to Dismiss" other people on this forum received, but mine technically is not a "Motion".

I will still file the Opposition, but if I don't get a hearing, what does this means? Do I still need to prepare for case management statement, case management conference ....?

Thanks

 

[lotechguy]

I was seeing some cases in my district filed in Jan. I am seeing some type of pattern where the AUSA seems to be filing extensions for some and Motion to dismiss/remand for others, even when they are filed on the same exact dates.
Wonder what is determining this ie Motion to dismiss/remand vs extensions. I have some theories, but dont know which one makes sense (1) DHS counsel is actually telling AUSA which ones *may* get solved soon (2) plaintiff attroneys are not agreeing to extension (which i find unbeleiveable) (3) AUSAs are seeing the judge's record and deciding what to do without any input from DHS counsel. Wonder which one is true ? If (1) is true it may indicate a pattern of certain names/etc that may be cleared than others.

 

[DUDE12190]

I was seeing some cases in my district filed in Jan. I am seeing some type of pattern where the AUSA seems to be filing extensions for some and Motion to dismiss/remand for others, even when they are filed on the same exact dates.
Wonder what is determining this ie Motion to dismiss/remand vs extensions. I have some theories, but dont know which one makes sense (1) DHS counsel is actually telling AUSA which ones *may* get solved soon (2) plaintiff attroneys are not agreeing to extension (which i find unbeleiveable) (3) AUSAs are seeing the judge's record and deciding what to do without any input from DHS counsel. Wonder which one is true ? If (1) is true it may indicate a pattern of certain names/etc that may be cleared than others.

You are right. very good insight. In some district like mine, I am not seeing MTD's at all, but extensions and answers. I am also seeing that some cases got cleared and got their citizenship in 2 months while others took 6 or 7 months. My understanding is that it also depends on how many HITS someone gets on the FBI name check. If hits are many, office of general counsel delays and ask AUSA to file extension/s depending on the case. Also, I think after Feb 2007 Memo, they are taking each case differently. Best of Luck to you! regards, dude

 

[wenlock]

You are right. very good insight. In some district like mine, I am not seeing MTD's at all, but extensions and answers. I am also seeing that some cases got cleared and got their citizenship in 2 months while others took 6 or 7 months. My understanding is that it also depends on how many HITS someone gets on the FBI name check. If hits are many, office of general counsel delays and ask AUSA to file extension/s depending on the case. Also, I think after Feb 2007 Memo, they are taking each case differently. Best of Luck to you! regards, dude

Based on my conversation with AUSA it all depends on what type of information FBI has and from which database it comes to them. If hit is just a ident it clears quickly. If it is positive hit then they try to talk to source of information and figure out level of further research needed or not.

Positive hit get solved by single agent or some times by penal. It is all relative meanwhile USCIS has no clue all they can do is expediate request period. Now when information comes back to USCIS it might not be sufficent according to there needs and they can ask for more stuff.

Every case is unique so they never has time line when one case will get completed.

 

[hamidrabbasi]

Hello everybody

I filed my N400 Oct 2006 and fingerprinted in november in Houston since then I have not anyhting from INS. Iknow many cases has been much faster, do I need to start worring yet? since I have not had my interviwe yet, when is the time I could realistically think about suing UCSIC?

Thanks

 

[paz1960]

Hello everybody

I filed my N400 Oct 2006 and fingerprinted in november in Houston since then I have not anyhting from INS. Iknow many cases has been much faster, do I need to start worring yet? since I have not had my interviwe yet, when is the time I could realistically think about suing UCSIC?

Thanks

Because you didn't have your interview yet, 8 U.S.C. 1447(b) can't help you (the 120 day clock is triggered by the date of examination). The only option would be a WOM type lawsuit, but there you need to prove that your application was unreasonably delayed. There is no clear definition in any statue or regulation what can be considered unreasonable delay. In several immigration related lawsuits, judges considered that a 2 year or longer delay is unreasonable. I would think that you will not be able to have a good chance winning your case if you file your complaint earlier than 2008. But it is really up to the Court to decide what is unreasonable delay.

 

[zevs]

Horrraaayyyyyyyy!!!!!!

Hi Guys,

my husband just called with a news that I received a letter from USCIS stating,

"You have been granted a Permanent Resident Status as March 26, 2007,etc...."

What a relief! My WoM has actually worked! My Name Check procedure was completed next day after the initial hearing, and 3 days after my second fingerprints were done I've received an approval letter.

I have the second hearing set in 2 weeks. Do you think I still need to hold on on my lawsuit until the "actual card" will arrive? Or since I've got what I asked in my prayer, I have to agree to dismiss my case becase my case now is a moot?

 

[missingpa]

No PACER Update 8 days after Proof of Service was filed

Hi everyone,

I mailed the proof of services forms early last week to the court. I included 3 copies: 1 was for the court record, 1 was for the judge assigned to my case (per the local rule of the Central District Court of CA), and 1 was requested as the return copy. Last Friday I received the return copy in the mail stamped as "Filed 03/20/2007." However, 8 days after I still have not seen any PACER update that proof of service has been filed and the deadline by which the defendants have to answer the complaint.

I am really concerned about this. The thing is I screwed up once before and filed only 1 copy, and got a Notice of Document Discrepancies. It took me almost a month to realize that I had to file the same thing again with the correct number of copies, and after I did that, still nothing happens.

What do you guys think? Is this normal? Would the court clerk stamp the return copy if there is something wrong with the paper work? Should I take half a day off and drive to the court to inquire about it? I remember whatsnamecheck is also in the same court. So whatsnamecheck, what is your experience?

Please everyone, I really appreciate your help now.

 

[missingpa]

By the way, this is what my docket report looks like now:

Date Filed # Docket Text

01/26/2007 1 COMPLAINT against defendants Michael Chertoff, Emilio T Gonzalez, Paul Novak, Robert S Muller.(Filing fee $ 350 Paid), filed by plaintiffs XXX, YYY.(rrey, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007)
01/26/2007 60 Day Summons Issued re Complaint - (Discovery)[1] as to Michael Chertoff, Emilio T Gonzalez, Paul Novak, Robert S Muller. (rrey, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007)
01/26/2007 2 CERTIFICATION AND NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs XXX, YYY. (rrey, ) (Entered: 01/31/2007)
02/27/2007 3 NOTICE OF DOCUMENT DISCREPANCIES AND ORDER by Judge Dean D. Pregerson ORDERING proof of service of summons and complaint submitted by Plaintiffs XXX, YYY received on 2/23/07 to be filed and processed; filed date to be the date the document was stamped Received but not Filed with the Clerk.(bp, ) (Entered: 02/28/2007)

 

[shvili]

Based on my conversation with AUSA it all depends on what type of information FBI has and from which database it comes to them. If hit is just a ident it clears quickly. If it is positive hit then they try to talk to source of information and figure out level of further research needed or not.

Positive hit get solved by single agent or some times by penal. It is all relative meanwhile USCIS has no clue all they can do is expediate request period. Now when information comes back to USCIS it might not be sufficent according to there needs and they can ask for more stuff.

Every case is unique so they never has time line when one case will get completed.

Lotechguy, Dude, Wenlock and everyone:

It's also interesting to compare number of MTD filed in our area (Northern CA) with other places. I have a suspicion (may be because I'm still an optimist on this point) that in CA there are less MTDs than in other states, so here AUSA file extensions, nc cleared later.

On the other hand, if like you say (and probably you are right), it solely depends on individual nc results, CA CIS has nothing to do with it unless they request to expedite, and if they indeed stopped expediting in Dec/06, it should be no difference.

Any comments?

 

[shvili]

Hi Guys,

my husband just called with a news that I received a letter from USCIS stating,

"You have been granted a Permanent Resident Status as March 26, 2007,etc...."

What a relief! My WoM has actually worked! My Name Check procedure was completed next day after the initial hearing, and 3 days after my second fingerprints were done I've received an approval letter.

I have the second hearing set in 2 weeks. Do you think I still need to hold on on my lawsuit until the "actual card" will arrive? Or since I've got what I asked in my prayer, I have to agree to dismiss my case becase my case now is a moot?

Zevs,

Congratulations!

Could you update on where/when you filed?

I remember our Seniors commented on not to dismiss until you have a solid proof. But a letter from USCIS sounds pretty solid to me. My advice is wait for the answer from our pros.

 

[yvesliu]

Today, I received a letter from Homeland Security asking to do another Bio-matix. I don't know if it is triggered by the law-suit, but it is about 15 months since my last one. So, maybe it does not mean anything. It is my third finger prints now.

 

[mgzh]

more and more cases list in MTD

i go over some recent cases, and found in MTD, The AUSA put more cases in there, some case is from 1938,1944........the entire MTD almost over 20 pages. it's hard to find and print out all the cases form PACER. In one case, the ausa list 60 cases, it's hard for a Pro Se person to read all the cases in detail and write their OPP in 2 weeks after they got MTD. Especially most people have a full time job to make a living............it's getting tough