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

[lnn]

NJ cases

Hi, Guys,

Does anyone have any detailed information regarding the unfavorable I-485 cases in NJ district (see the quoted email below) such as case number? I tried on PACER and used 890 category but couldn't find any.

Your help is greatly appreciated.


Delayed in New Jersy for Over 2 Years

When I am still emailing my AUSA to ask him to prepare the motion to dismiss for moot, I received the court order in mail, which dismissed my case (i.e. approved AUSA's MTD). I think the judge did not even read my OPP. He simply cited a previous order, and claimed that my 44-month delay is not unreasonable in this post-11 age.

Since I got my GC one day before the order, my case is moot, and I can't appeal this court order. (I am Pro Se, and the cost is not worthing appealing).

Anyway, I think NJ court has continuously dismissed 4 WOM I485 cases in the past 2-3 months. It has become the unique dead zone for WOM I485 cases. The only chance to stop this trend is for someone with a strong case to appeal in the 3rd Cir. Court.

Now, when I look back, I still think it is worthwhile to has this experience
(1) I am not sure when I will get my GC if I didn't start this lawsuit,
(2) I learned so much from this experience, and now I have a new perspective on many issues around me.

Finally, I have tried my best at each step of the lawsuit, and even now I still think I did a reasonable good job in preparing my OPP. However, I do feel very sorry that I didn't "win" the case for all of you, my friends, who are still fighting for your long over-due rights.

 

[Chrismartin76]

That link doesn't work. Do you know if this applied to green-card related lawsuits or only citizenship lawsuits?
-Chris

It sounds like you are right. Here is the appropriate text that might make WOM or 1447b suits ineffective once this is passed:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:1:./temp/~c11061ZXrU:e511769:

 

[ncblackhole]

That link doesn't work. Do you know if this applied to green-card related lawsuits or only citizenship lawsuits?
-Chris

I don't think it says anything regarding the lawsuits.. see court does not have authority to "grant any visa" and that was true before. Court does not approve your case anyway.. it just compels FBI, CIS to do their job. This bill does not say anything against that.

If I have missed something, can you show me where it is written that court will not allow for filing WOM against CIS anymore?

 

[Chrismartin76]

Could you explain how the case you mentioned (Danilov v. Aguirre) created a dangerous precedent? I did some research and couldn't figure out what the precedent in question is.
-Chris

Hello always.wired, welcome to this forum.
The information you heard is not true, at least not in this categoric form. People used to think that they simply copy&paste a complaint and pay $350 filing fee + mailing expenses and their cases will be solved automatically, without any further pain. It used to be so in a majority of the cases, because filing a lawsuit was enough to trigger an expedite request from USCIS to FBI to complete the name check. Because the increasing number of such lawsuits, USCIS changed their policy on Dec. 22, 2006 (the date of their internal memo) and they no longer are asking automatically an expedited processing of your name check when you file a lawsuit against them. It is more likely that the lawsuit will proceed further; probably you will need to be able to oppose a motion to dismiss lack of jurisdiction, you will need to be able to file a counter motion for summary judgement or handle different other steps normal in a lawsuit (case management conference, discovery plan, go to a hearing, explain you case coherently to a judge, etc.). So unless you are willing to dedicate a lot of time and effort to educate yourself in these types of legal issues, I would strongly recommend to seek a professional immigration lawyer because sueing the government should not be taken lightly. Doing this unprepared you jeopardize not only your own case but you can create dangerous precedence (like Danilov v. Aguirre) which will be used against many fellow sufferers who decide to file a similar lawsuit later.

However, there are plenty of examples when the courts ordered the Government to complete the name check and adjudication in a certain finite timeframe, so if you are stuck in the name check a lawsuit is probably still the only way to get your case solved.

Depending on you had your interview or not you may have different options for the lawsuit.

 

[Chrismartin76]

Here's the relevant portion of the bill. Pay special attention to line item (k) at the end. It doesn't state that lawsuits will not be permitted, but it does say "no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
I don't know if this applies to lawsuits filed before the passage of this bill. Of course it's also not clear if this bill will pass.
-Chris


SEC. 531. COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.

Section 103 (8 U.S.C. 1103) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(i) Requirement for Background Checks- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, until appropriate background and security checks, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security, have been completed, and the information provided to and assessed by the official with jurisdiction to grant or issue the benefit or documentation, on an in camera basis as may be necessary with respect to classified, law enforcement, or other information that cannot be disclosed publicly, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, or any court may not--

`(1) grant or order the grant of adjustment of status of an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence;

`(2) grant or order the grant of any other status, relief, protection from removal, or other benefit under the immigration laws; or

`(3) issue any documentation evidencing or related to such grant by the Secretary, the Attorney General, or any court.

`(j) Requirement To Resolve Fraud Allegations- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, until any suspected or alleged fraud relating to the granting of any status (including the granting of adjustment of status), relief, protection from removal, or other benefit under this Act has been investigated and resolved, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General may not be required to--

`(1) grant or order the grant of adjustment of status of an alien to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence;

`(2) grant or order the grant of any other status, relief, protection from removal, or other benefit under the immigration laws; or

`(3) issue any documentation evidencing or related to such grant by the Secretary, the Attorney General, or any court.

`(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts.'.

I don't think it says anything regarding the lawsuits.. see court does not have authority to "grant any visa" and that was true before. Court does not approve your case anyway.. it just compels FBI, CIS to do their job. This bill does not say anything against that.

If I have missed something, can you show me where it is written that court will not allow for filing WOM against CIS anymore?

 

[shvili]

Could you explain how the case you mentioned (Danilov v. Aguirre) created a dangerous precedent? I did some research and couldn't figure out what the precedent in question is.
-Chris

Chrismartin76,

If you're planning to file WOM or 1447(b), you really need to know this fact: Danilov's case is the first case where government's defence successfully argued that the examination of Danilov by CIS(INS) did not trigger the statutory 120-days waiting period becuase... examination discussed in the law INCLUDES all required background checks (name check) so his examination is not yet completed until his nc results arrive. Hence "examination=investigation" and the statue does not apply since 120 days have not even started to tick.

Most of the courts in the "sound mind" ruled against this twisted logic, i.e. claiming that "examination=interview" and that exmination is a "single event and not a process". But the Danilov's case provided the longed-for argument that governmment successfully used and several cases (-a handful of cases, really), that made N-400 applicants loose. Attached is the infamous Danilov's decision:

 

[shvili]

Here's the relevant portion of the bill. Pay special attention to line item (k) at the end. It doesn't state that lawsuits will not be permitted, but it does say "no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
I don't know if this applies to lawsuits filed before the passage of this bill. Of course it's also not clear if this bill will pass.
-Chris

SEC. 531. COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.
(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts.'.

It looks like a really dangerous bill. However, there's much talk in congress about getting FBI more accountable and standardazing their time on the background check processes. Is there not any other part of the bill that discusses the procedure for FBI to do the background check? I really hope that there is - otherwise, this part of the bill alone would violate many rights any american resident is used to accept for granted. In other words, if it's accepted in such version alone, I would imagine (-hopefully) an immigrant lobby would jump out of their skin to fight.

So do you have the fuller picture you could share?

 

[raknahsivar]

hello kk405
i am a recent filer of a 1447b case in the southern district of NY as well
looks like you are about 1 month ahead of me in the case timeline. all the best with your conference and please post any developments as they occur
i will do the same
raknahsivar

 

[lotechguy]

It looks like a really dangerous bill. However, there's much talk in congress about getting FBI more accountable and standardazing their time on the background check processes. Is there not any other part of the bill that discusses the procedure for FBI to do the background check? I really hope that there is - otherwise, this part of the bill alone would violate many rights any american resident is used to accept for granted. In other words, if it's accepted in such version alone, I would imagine (-hopefully) an immigrant lobby would jump out of their skin to fight.

So do you have the fuller picture you could share?

As per Randall Emory of americans for families united, this is not the compromise that was agreed in Senate yesterday, it sjust the old (last years) bill put up last week as a starting point. The real bill is being still worked on to introduce in senate next week

 

[hopeforall2]

As per Randall Emory of americans for families united, this is not the compromise that was agreed in Senate yesterday, it sjust the old (last years) bill put up last week as a starting point. The real bill is being still worked on to introduce in senate next week

Thank you all for you kind contribution , but we Really need to follow up on this, and understand the in's and out's of this bill for future strategy.

Please post any new information; after all, Aren’t we all affected by this bill if passed stripping courts from granting any relief or compiling the Government to act on a delayed cases reasonably?.

 

[shvili]

Thanks, shvili!
Mine was Ila Deiss and her paralegal. She is the one who handled that extraordinary case in San Jose resulted in naturalization granted directly by the judge (message #10983, page 733). She was very busy, but professional, polite and helpful (some people might have had different experience with her). Not that she was particularly happy about all this USCIS cases falling on her head, but she seemed to understand that it was not our fault that her clients screwed up big time.
Best of luck to you with your case!
snorlax

Again, it shows how much of our fate is ruled by pure luck. You had a good AUSA and your case progressed nicely. (And I am really glad for you!) As for my husband's case, we will see. The problem is, if this bill is getting passed within 2-3-4 months time, it may cause our cases to loose. So for now, let's hope it'll give us time to resolve our cases, and that its language would put restrictions on FBI to stop this indefinite wait.

 

[shvili]

As per Randall Emory of americans for families united, this is not the compromise that was agreed in Senate yesterday, it sjust the old (last years) bill put up last week as a starting point. The real bill is being still worked on to introduce in senate next week

I was just listening to the NPR an hr. ago where the "talking heads" discussed it a bit. First of all, as it addresses the major problems with illegal immigration it is favored by many and so considered bipartisan. Secondly, it is what president hopes to be his legacy since it has a good chance to pass. So it may be aggresively worked upon when introduced in senate. Again, I hope it won't pass without clearly specified timelimits on FBI to complete nc-s, otherwise it just legilizes total unaccountability for FBI to (un)decide fate of a really large number of people. So hopefully it would either come with some other provisions or simply doesn't discuss FBI issues at all. So please anyone having any info on this develpment, post it please and let's keep an eye on it.

 

[sksharma76]

Another New Citizen

Hi everybody i successfully passed my N400/ I751 Interview today and took the oath an hour later.I have to say it wouldnt have been possible without the help of this board.I have to tell i was really nervous about the interview due to the lawsuit but interview went smooth.The officer did not seee any documents from me but my Green card and went over the application.He never even mentioned I751 I gave him the changes that have been made since i submitted my N-400 like my new phone number and details of my last visit to india he didnot seem to know about lawsuit neither did i disclosed it.Interview wasnt taped and was pretty easy.
Some people who took oath with me got there citizenship in 3 months this really pissed me off when i think some of the more derserving people on this board are waiting for years .I found this board in december and followed all the advice in here.
Although i got the MTD for my case Fortunately the letter to First lady cleared my name check and i am done with USCIS.

I need to personally thank Wenlock and PAZ for helping me draft various documents along the way.I wish you all best of luck.

 

[Mingjing]

My and my wife's I485 were both approved. My WOM lawyer called me May 16th afternoon saying AUSA called her about my case approvals. USCIS online case status at that date showed something like finger print review is completed (note: it had been "finger print result was recieved on xxx day). Then May 17th morning I recieved 4 emails (2 emails per petition) from CIS, stating "Card production ordered.On May 16, 2007, we ordered production of your new card...". I went in for an Infopass appointment this afternoon and got my passport stamped with a temp. I551 form for travel.

I have not recieved approval letter, nor card.

Here are my case details

Priority Date: 08/2001
I140 RD: 08/2003
I485 RD: 11/2003
Name Check stuck from: 12/2003
I140 AD: 09/2004
1st FP: 04/2004
2nd FP: 04/2005
3rd FP:09/2006
4 EADs and 5 APs (My good GOD!!!)
WOM filed by attorney: 01/2007, Northern California District MTD recieved: 03/2007 Opposition to MTD Deadline: 06/2007 Court Hearing Scheduled: 06/15/2007 USCIS Online Status: 05/17/2007 shows "Card production ordered.On May 16, 2007, we ordered production of your new card..."
Don't know when name check was completed

I believe name checks will be expedited if you have waited for long. Since my WOM suit never got to the point I file opposition, so Pacer will show soon that my case was jointly dismissed after MTD filed but before I respond. From what I read in last few months, I'd say for I485 only that 2 years+ waiting is a workable case, and 3 years+ is a compelling case. Not sure about less than 2 years - depend on many other factors like judge and district court opinion.

I did hear from one of the AUSAs (through email) that they look at the time "applications" (i.e. our I485 or naturalization peititions) were filed. The underlying message I took away is they still look at the filing date of our immigration application as it relates to how expedite should be handled. This immigration application filing date, howeer could be either significant or insignificant compared to many other factors though.

By the way, my lawyer said that the MTD these days seem to become shorter and thinner by day compared to MTD I got in late March. Hope that is true in both Northern California and other districts.

Since my case will be dismissed I guess, it does not seem that I will have a chance to be a prevailing party, and hence my $5,400 or so is lost. Not that I think the approval is not worth the money, but I feel strongly the government should reimburse me. It is their failure that causes the law suit. Well, then how do I get government to compensate me, and each of you, for the tremendous mental distress and suffer to our personal and prefessional life?

As I think about this ordeal in the last day or two, what I want to remind myself and tell many of you is that learn a lesson from this ordeal:

0. I truly believe what defendants did (name check delay) is wrong. They have to correc their problems.

1. Don't take company lawyer's words as must be true. My company's lawyer did not mention a word about WOM though I repeatedly asked for ANY, ANY kind of way to dislodge stucked name check. Either comany lawyers areincompetent, or they were lying all the way, until I found out WOM Nov. 06 by myself.

2. Keep excercising and keep your mental and physical health to the best you can. I probably spend 6 to 10 hours for tedious excercise per week on average for the last 2~3 years. It is only during part of the excercise that I feel temporarily BUT TRULY broke myself free from this black hole.

3. Don't blame yourself for stuck in the name check. It is NOT your fault.

4. Don't avoid it, and don't stop finding ways to dig yourself out, or falsely hope it will be resolved soon if you wait. I didn't do a thing from month 18 to month 36, because I got into the delusion that it may resolve soon because it has been so long. That argument is possible, but absolutely NOT probable. I also got so stressed out that I can't think about it, so I choose to avoid it so I could feel I am living a normal life. I ended up, just as many of you did, felt the distress and dispair in my deepest dreams.

5. Finally, as I move forward, and when each of you still fighting be approved in a nice day soon to come, don't forget about this ordeal and the pain each of had to go through. BE KIND TO THE WEAK, STOP THE ABUSER, HELP THE HELPLESS!

Will I forgive whoever was behind did this long delay to me? I will try but I know I don't today.

I will stick around so I can see the good news continue to flow out...

 

[always.wired]

Withdrawing N-400 after successful adjudication

Here is a different issue than most others are facing:

My wife wants to withdraw N-400 application after successful adjudication, and revert back to Green Card status. Any suggestions?

 

[always.wired]

Withdrawing N-400 after successful adjudication

Here is a different issue than most others are facing:

My wife wants to withdraw N-400 application after successful adjudication, and revert back to Green Card status. Is this possible? Any suggestions?

 

[lotechguy]

My and my wife's I485 were both approved. My WOM lawyer called me May 16th afternoon saying AUSA called her about my case approvals. USCIS online case status at that date showed something like finger print review is completed (note: it had been "finger print result was recieved on xxx day). Then May 17th morning I recieved 4 emails (2 emails per petition) from CIS, stating "Card production ordered.On May 16, 2007, we ordered production of your new card...". I went in for an Infopass appointment this afternoon and got my passport stamped with a temp. I551 form for travel.

I have not recieved approval letter, nor card.

Here are my case details

Priority Date: 08/2001
I140 RD: 08/2003
I485 RD: 11/2003
Name Check stuck from: 12/2003
I140 AD: 09/2004
1st FP: 04/2004
2nd FP: 04/2005
3rd FP:09/2006
4 EADs and 5 APs (My good GOD!!!)
WOM filed by attorney: 01/2007, Northern California District MTD recieved: 03/2007 Opposition to MTD Deadline: 06/2007 Court Hearing Scheduled: 06/15/2007 USCIS Online Status: 05/17/2007 shows "Card production ordered.On May 16, 2007, we ordered production of your new card..."
Don't know when name check was completed

I believe name checks will be expedited if you have waited for long. Since my WOM suit never got to the point I file opposition, so Pacer will show soon that my case was jointly dismissed after MTD filed but before I respond. From what I read in last few months, I'd say for I485 only that 2 years+ waiting is a workable case, and 3 years+ is a compelling case. Not sure about less than 2 years - depend on many other factors like judge and district court opinion.

I did hear from one of the AUSAs (through email) that they look at the time "applications" (i.e. our I485 or naturalization peititions) were filed. The underlying message I took away is they still look at the filing date of our immigration application as it relates to how expedite should be handled. This immigration application filing date, howeer could be either significant or insignificant compared to many other factors though.

By the way, my lawyer said that the MTD these days seem to become shorter and thinner by day compared to MTD I got in late March. Hope that is true in both Northern California and other districts.

Since my case will be dismissed I guess, it does not seem that I will have a chance to be a prevailing party, and hence my $5,400 or so is lost. Not that I think the approval is not worth the money, but I feel strongly the government should reimburse me. It is their failure that causes the law suit. Well, then how do I get government to compensate me, and each of you, for the tremendous mental distress and suffer to our personal and prefessional life?

As I think about this ordeal in the last day or two, what I want to remind myself and tell many of you is that learn a lesson from this ordeal:

0. I truly believe what defendants did (name check delay) is wrong. They have to correc their problems.

1. Don't take company lawyer's words as must be true. My company's lawyer did not mention a word about WOM though I repeatedly asked for ANY, ANY kind of way to dislodge stucked name check. Either comany lawyers areincompetent, or they were lying all the way, until I found out WOM Nov. 06 by myself.

2. Keep excercising and keep your mental and physical health to the best you can. I probably spend 6 to 10 hours for tedious excercise per week on average for the last 2~3 years. It is only during part of the excercise that I feel temporarily BUT TRULY broke myself free from this black hole.

3. Don't blame yourself for stuck in the name check. It is NOT your fault.

4. Don't avoid it, and don't stop finding ways to dig yourself out, or falsely hope it will be resolved soon if you wait. I didn't do a thing from month 18 to month 36, because I got into the delusion that it may resolve soon because it has been so long. That argument is possible, but absolutely NOT probable. I also got so stressed out that I can't think about it, so I choose to avoid it so I could feel I am living a normal life. I ended up, just as many of you did, felt the distress and dispair in my deepest dreams.

5. Finally, as I move forward, and when each of you still fighting be approved in a nice day soon to come, don't forget about this ordeal and the pain each of had to go through. BE KIND TO THE WEAK, STOP THE ABUSER, HELP THE HELPLESS!

Will I forgive whoever was behind did this long delay to me? I will try but I know I don't today.

I will stick around so I can see the good news continue to flow out...

Tax laws may allow you to claim deduction for your expenses if it was "legal expenses for a claim againsts the Federal Government". It sounds like WOM expenses should qualify in the category.

 

[shvili]

My and my wife's I485 were both approved. My WOM lawyer called me May 16th afternoon saying AUSA called her about my case approvals. USCIS online case status at that date showed something like finger print review is completed (note: it had been "finger print result was recieved on xxx day). Then May 17th morning I recieved 4 emails (2 emails per petition) from CIS, stating "Card production ordered.On May 16, 2007, we ordered production of your new card...". I went in for an Infopass appointment this afternoon and got my passport stamped with a temp. I551 form for travel.


I will stick around so I can see the good news continue to flow out...

Mingjing, I am so happy for you!!! Congratulations!!!

So they seem to be moving nowadays, and I agree with you, they seem to expedite depending on the number of years stuck in the process. We just need to see, if this spring's trend will continue through the summer, when my husband's reply is due from AUSA. For now during the last month we saw quite a few cases resolved. (And our case is really a clear-cut, 3.5+yrs waiting and 1447 complaint, so unless they dig up something non-existent in my husband's file, it is a very strong case).

I have few questions to you and everyone who can comment:

1. you mentioned that you have some 1447 cases stored but not organized yet. Would you please forward them to me? Some of the cases may be the same I posted a while ago, but I'd appreciate more cases, especially from our district.

2. Do you by chance have any information on AUSA in SF E. Olsen?

3. Also, our court clerk said that she won't stamp (issue) any summons to AUSA since (obviously) they are defence and not defendants in the case. However, in the cases filed I saw many serve AUSA with separate summons. The clerk just said that we can give AUSA a copy of one of the defendants' summons with our complaint, and that's exactly what I did. AUSA office signed a tiny piece of paper that they got served on May 7. AUSA Olsen was assigned on May 14, which is the date to count 60 days from. Did you also serve separate summons on AUSA?

4. One of the cases shows plaintiff filed a separate Consent to proceed with the Magistrate judge, very early in the case. I understood we can wait and do it together with AUSA (who can draft the doc correctly, together with the ADR process consent) so I can save myself from extra work. Did your laywer draft a separate Consent form and if so when?

Thank you for your great contribution to the forum and please stick a while longer to help all of us!

Shvili

 

[shvili]

Tax laws may allow you to claim deduction for your expenses if it was "legal expenses for a claim againsts the Federal Government". It sounds like WOM expenses should qualify in the category.

Lo,

great idea! So this is another reason to keep all those receipts (incl postage)...

 

[shvili]

Hi everybody i successfully passed my N400/ I751 Interview today and took the oath an hour later.I have to say it wouldnt have been possible without the help of this board.I have to tell i was really nervous about the interview due to the lawsuit but interview went smooth.The officer did not seee any documents from me but my Green card and went over the application.He never even mentioned I751 I gave him the changes that have been made since i submitted my N-400 like my new phone number and details of my last visit to india he didnot seem to know about lawsuit neither did i disclosed it.Interview wasnt taped and was pretty easy.
Some people who took oath with me got there citizenship in 3 months this really pissed me off when i think some of the more derserving people on this board are waiting for years .I found this board in december and followed all the advice in here.
Although i got the MTD for my case Fortunately the letter to First lady cleared my name check and i am done with USCIS.

I need to personally thank Wenlock and PAZ for helping me draft various documents along the way. I wish you all best of luck.

sksharma76,

Congratulations! Enjoy being a citizen! (US Passport for travel alone is a great thing.)

Could you please post your case outline/timeframe?