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

[shvili]

The Immigration bill failed the test vote today. At least it is going to be delayed. Good news or bad? I guess it depends which of the amendments were accepted. Any thoughts.?

My personal opinion is depending on whether you consider the overall points (inlcuding granting status to illegals which inevitably would have been done at the expense of legal immigrants) or our forum agenda points (like finally gettting FBI and CIS accountable for the time they take on ncs and adjudication process), it good and bad, in the same order. But mostly it's good from both angles, as I'm sceptical that FBI/CIS could be ever ordered by enforcing any new legislation without first drastically restructuring and completely changing ways they operate. (and they might have also included stripping of court jurisdiction in there)

At least new members have time to file their cases until (and if) this President returns to this bill.

Here's a link to bill's article in New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/08/w...1181340329-rCvbicNyImPA3kvOtwvZeQ&oref=slogin

 

[toolong2]

more questions since I can't find a copy of my N-400 application and it might take forever to receive a copy from CIS....

1. Is it true that it's possible (very likely) for people to have to go through another interview after winning the lawsuit, before the oath ceremony?

2. What would be asked in this 2nd interview? Will questions be asked about employment history and past years' residency addresses?

please also remind me what was asked in your first interview besides taking the test?

3. In the 2nd interview, is it required to take another test?

4. In the lawsuit, if a hearing/trial is required, do you think they'll ask me in details about employment history and past years' residency addresses?

Thank you so much.

 

[aryin]

Help me , please!

I called AUSA and ask him to expedite my case last week, and I received a letter from AUSA today. He wrote " I do not have information to report about the status of your pending application, because the status of your applications is now the subject of litigation". What shoud I do to prepare for next step.

 

[lazycis]

I called AUSA and ask him to expedite my case last week, and I received a letter from AUSA today. He wrote " I do not have information to report about the status of your pending application, because the status of your applications is now the subject of litigation". What shoud I do to prepare for next step.

What stage are you in? There is not much we can do if AUSA doe not want to cooperate.

 

[aryin]

almost 2 month after I filed WOM

Thank you for reply

 

[shvili]

I called AUSA and ask him to expedite my case last week, and I received a letter from AUSA today. He wrote " I do not have information to report about the status of your pending application, because the status of your applications is now the subject of litigation". What shoud I do to prepare for next step.

Aryin,
AUSA answer to you is absurd: s/he should not answer to your q-n if you DIDN't FILE your law suit, but since you did, it's his/her responsibility to attempt to settle the case without wasting judicial resources, hence, before the hearing. Next time, you might write to him a quote from the pro se handbook and also the CFR/local rules (perhaps Lazycis can advise, which?) -that shows that AUSA is supposed to work with you on settling your case, not to stall it even further. Just be very careful/precise on what you write/tell him/her next time.
Good Luck!

 

[lazycis]

Thank you for reply

aryin,
Did you get an answer to your complaint from AUSA? If not, review your complaint, maybe you can make it stronger or add additional evidence to support your position.

Check also this link http://www.opm.gov/er/adrguide/Section1-justice.asp maybe AUSA will take a second look at your request.
It says, in particular: "The Attorney General issued an Order on April 6, 1995, to promote the broader use of ADR in appropriate cases to improve access to justice for all citizens and to lead to more effective resolution of disputes involving the Government. The Department's program is focused on civil matters, rather than criminal matters or enforcement of criminal fines."
And
"As the biggest user of the Federal courts in the country and the nation's most prolific litigator, the Department recognizes the necessity of considering alternatives tolitigation in all appropriate cases. The goal of the Department's program is to benefit litigants by producing better and quicker results, and benefit the entire justice system by preserving the scarce resources of the courts for the disputes that only courts can decide."

Indeed, AUSA response to your request contradicts common sense, as Shvili noted.

 

[aryin]

How to reply to AUSA

Hi lazycis and shvili,

Please tell me detail how to reply AUSA's letter.

aryin,
Did you get an answer to your complaint from AUSA? If not, review your complaint, maybe you can make it stronger or add additional evidence to support your position.

Check also this link http://www.opm.gov/er/adrguide/Section1-justice.asp maybe AUSA will take a second look at your request.
It says, in particular: "The Attorney General issued an Order on April 6, 1995, to promote the broader use of ADR in appropriate cases to improve access to justice for all citizens and to lead to more effective resolution of disputes involving the Government. The Department's program is focused on civil matters, rather than criminal matters or enforcement of criminal fines."
And
"As the biggest user of the Federal courts in the country and the nation's most prolific litigator, the Department recognizes the necessity of considering alternatives tolitigation in all appropriate cases. The goal of the Department's program is to benefit litigants by producing better and quicker results, and benefit the entire justice system by preserving the scarce resources of the courts for the disputes that only courts can decide."

Indeed, AUSA response to your request contradicts common sense, as Shvili noted.

 

[aryin]

How to write a quote?

Hi shvili,

I have a pro se handbook (northen district of california). Could you tell me how to reply AUSA and which page of handbook can help me.

thanks.

Aryin,
AUSA answer to you is absurd: s/he should not answer to your q-n if you DIDN't FILE your law suit, but since you did, it's his/her responsibility to attempt to settle the case without wasting judicial resources, hence, before the hearing. Next time, you might write to him a quote from the pro se handbook and also the CFR/local rules (perhaps Lazycis can advise, which?) -that shows that AUSA is supposed to work with you on settling your case, not to stall it even further. Just be very careful/precise on what you write/tell him/her next time.
Good Luck!

 

[aryin]

Hi lazycis,

Do you mean AUSA answer my question in "grounds for relief" in my complaint?

aryin,
Did you get an answer to your complaint from AUSA? If not, review your complaint, maybe you can make it stronger or add additional evidence to support your position.

 

[glorifix]

I am interested in filing a wom since stuck in NC for 3 yrs. All examples of pro se complaints are different from a regular EB 485. People have applied in person or gone for interviews which is different than regular process.
Can anyone please provide me a word document of a wom complaint that I can use for my own complaint that I plan to file this week. Thanks.

 

[shvili]

Hi shvili,

I have a pro se handbook (northen district of california). Could you tell me how to reply AUSA and which page of handbook can help me.

thanks.

Aryin,

Pro se handbook talks very little directly about responsibility of the parties to attempt to settle, so use great Lazycis points and advise for more help. But the chapters 8-14 descuss the whole pre-hearing stages and discovery process obviously used to avoid and minimize wasting time/expences on judicial process. What I found reading chap-s 8-13, on p. 83 there is this:

"...the parties are expected to call each other and meet in person, in a process that is called meeting and conferring, and to try to agree on a number of issues." It then goes on to list steps to prepare for CMC.

I'm sorry I can't advise you more specifically since our case is not on this stage yet so I do not have any direct experience myself in doing this, but just from reading a little on Pro Se book I think you have great info on how to follow the procees. Also check CFR and statues Lazycis pointed to before,and this site of local court rules:
LOCAL COURT RULES HERE:
http://www.cand.uscourts.gov/CAND/L...b2106e6db882569b4005a23f1?OpenDocument#TOC2_1

I really think that after reading these chapters (8-14) and searching extra sources (see above), you can come up with a very good complaint in case AUSA refuses to cooperate with you in the discovery process. Chapter 12 tells you what to do specifiaclly in such a case.

Good luck!

 

[Mingjing]

Yvesliu,

Some members here including myself encouraged you to consider hiring an attorney, based on the fact that even the judge on your case implied to you that attorney on your behalf will benefit you. I still think that is true. You may be able to handle some individual documents on your own by leveraging avail. templates members posted on this forum. However, I feel another layer of challenges you are facing seem to be the dynamics in the working relationship between you and your AUSA. I feel a competent attorney may be able to change that chemistry to a much better flavor.

I also assume the attorney cost from this point on will be less than $5000. I myself spent total of $5500 on my case using attorney. You have progressed quite far into the process, and the cost from now on should be less than mine, I assume.
Mingjing

Today, I found a new entry in the pacer. "Record of Order by XXXXXXXXXXXX: Setting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, #12, to be taken under advisement by XXXXXXXX on 7/9/2007. ORDER: When submitting dispositive motions and memoranda to the Court, the parties shall either file (in a format compatible with Word Perfect) a disk containing their motions and memoranda, excluding exhibits, or send copies by e-mail to XXXXXXXXXXXX. A MOTION, RESPONSE, OR REPLY WHICH FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER WILL BE STRICKEN. (da) (Entered: 06/06/2007)"

What does that mean? I am thinking about hiring a lawyer, because OPP is too hard for me to come up with in this short time period. With the new information on the pacer, does that mean I don't need to file OPP and just wait for the judge ruling? Is that true that after OPP, the lawyer pretty much do not need to do anything else more? For about $5000, does it worth to hire a lawyer just to file this OPP? I really appreciate any advices.

 

[Mingjing]

Just to share a data point on attorney pricing: My attorney charged $3500 for intial filing, and then another $2000 for filling opposition to MTD. I am in Northern California. I agree the total cost is on the higher side of average, but I don't think it is uncommon in my area.
Mingjing

$5000 seems a lot just to write the OPP. Shvili and I can do it for half the price
Seriously, it is not reasonable to spend $5000 for OPP. Try to find a lawyer who will do it for $1000-2000 (if you have a feeling lawyer will help in your case, it's a priority). Otherwise, you can do it yourself. You have a month to prepare, if you spend 1 hour a day, it will be easy. Look at other successfull OPP (start from cases posted on wiki). It seems that Missingpa has a good grip on it and other members will help you, I am sure.

 

[Mingjing]

I definitely don't think I would have got my name check cleared without filing WOM. My name check clearance definitely is triggered by WOM. There are many others with I485 pending longer than mine although mine is not a relatively old aged petition.

The only thing I can remmeber was that in late March (close to 60 days after filing), my attorney sent email to AUSA with a list of a few cases she handles. In the email, my attorney explained that these are "compelling" cases. There are about 4 to 5 of cases, and all of them have been pending over 2.5 years, and one of them pending longer than mine. So I guess mine being ranked the second is a good reason to be a compelling case. What is interesting from the AUSA's response via email is that this particular AUSA's own understanding is that they are looking at the dates the "applications" were filed. Not sure "applications" means WOM or underlying immigration petition. I think it is the latter case. That would mean USCIS/FBI consider how long my I485 has been pending name check in prioritizing expedite of name check.

In this email, my attorney also wrote about ME specifically - including the fact that I graduated from THE top MBA school (at least in her mind), and that I am a poor and unfortunate guy to be caught in name check.

I also used a lawyer, not Pro Se. My attorney started filing WOM in early 2006, and had closed over 20 WOM cases by the time I knew her. Not all of us including myself can say for sure attorney vs. Pro Se makes a difference though.

This is all I can think about. My name check was cleared on April 18 or so, 3 weeks after my lawyer's email (though I did not know the timing until 2 weeks I got my actual green card).

It may be just I am "lucky".

All said, I feel my success can say one thing that there is a process in defendants' to expedite name check and adjudicate our cases. Timing for our individual cases will differ for sure, but the outcome should not. Keep focused, and I am waiting for your good news.

Mingjing, thanks for your info and glad for your victory. If you don't mind, could you please share your thoughs on my question here. I am just wondering what has made your case stand out so that your NC and Green card were resolved even before filing Opp to MTD? Is it because you were lucky to have a nice AUSA? Did you submit a strong / distinctive reason with the WOM complain so that FBI expedited your NC, or just because it's your turn since you have been waiting long enough? I see most of the cases filed in early this year are still on Judge's desk waiting for decision of MTD. May be your experince can give us some hint on how to make our case stand out.

 

[toolong2]

For 1447b, I noticed that some people list only 3 defendants:
FBI (Robert S. Mueller), DHS (Michael Chertoff), USCIS (Emilio T. Gonzalez)

but some people also include local district director(s), is it really required? if I don't include them, will there be any disadventage?

And some also include US Attorney General (Alberto R. Gonzales), but I think that's incorrect?

Are the below addresses (for delivery summons) accurate? Thank you!



Alberto R. Gonzales, United States Attorney General
US Department of Justice
950 Pensylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001

Michael Chertoff, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security
US Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528

Emilio T. Gonzalez, Director of USCIS
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Washington, DC 90258

Robert S. Mueller, III, Director of FBI
Federal Bureau of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pensylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20535-0001

 

[siguy]

Is there any significant differences in attitude of the AUSA toward the case between I485 vs. Citizenship WOM ?

 

[SLIS]

Is there any significant differences in attitude of the AUSA toward the case between I485 vs. Citizenship WOM ?

USCIS views 1-485 cases very differently from citizenship cases, particularly after they put in place the new policy/criteria for expediting name check. AUSA can't do much. My AUSA has checked with USCIS twice now after seeing that they could very well lose. However, USCIS has been very firm in asserting that there will be no expedites on I-485 cases. So, we'll see how the judge rules.

 

[ggcc2001]

Motion For Status

it is probably true. My AUSA checked the status for me and said she cannot do much and asked me to set the court date. So I filed "MOTION FOR STATUS" yesterday. Any suggestions?

 

[gmlvsk]

USCIS views 1-485 cases very differently from citizenship cases, particularly after they put in place the new policy/criteria for expediting name check. AUSA can't do much. My AUSA has checked with USCIS twice now after seeing that they could very well lose. However, USCIS has been very firm in asserting that there will be no expedites on I-485 cases. So, we'll see how the judge rules.

My ausa told me same - that she can not request to expedite nc for adjusment cases