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

Hi lazycis,

I was hoping you could help me a little bit. I am currently a greencard holder, I filed the case for citizenship in early 2006, got fingerprinted in June 2006, but my mother and sister who also filed at the same time got their citizenship interview and all done by November 2006. I'm still waiting for FBI check to get done. I see a lot of talk about writ of mandamus, does this apply to my situation, or do you think I have no option other than waiting for them to get done.
 
mohman said:
Hi lazycis,

I was hoping you could help me a little bit. I am currently a greencard holder, I filed the case for citizenship in early 2006, got fingerprinted in June 2006, but my mother and sister who also filed at the same time got their citizenship interview and all done by November 2006. I'm still waiting for FBI check to get done. I see a lot of talk about writ of mandamus, does this apply to my situation, or do you think I have no option other than waiting for them to get done.
Click to expand...

Surely it applies to your situation. Looks like you did not have an interview, right? The first step would be to write to Mr/Mrs Bush and ask for help. If you've done that, it's time to file a lawsuit. Here is a sample complaint for such cases:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1777448&postcount=13028

Check this page if you want to proceed with the lawsuit
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FBI_name_check
 
qiu v chertoff 486 F. Supp 2d(DNJ 2007)

Did Qiu file an appeal ? (judge chesler)..
If so, I want to quote the appeal # in my MTD.( I cant find it in PACER)
I know Li in Li v Gonzalez(Judge Chesler) filed an appeal(07-2990).
 
lazycis said:
Surely it applies to your situation. Looks like you did not have an interview, right? The first step would be to write to Mr/Mrs Bush and ask for help. If you've done that, it's time to file a lawsuit. Here is a sample complaint for such cases:
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1777448&postcount=13028

Check this page if you want to proceed with the lawsuit
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FBI_name_check
Click to expand...

Thanks lazycis, I hvent had an interview, but I've written to Mrs Bush without a response. My congressmen and senator have been more responsive but say they really cant do much about the FBI.
one more thing someone suggested to me was calling the USCIS office in vermont and talking to a IO, but i dont know how to get past the automated messenger. Does anyone here know how to do that.
Also now i think I will file the lawsuit.
 
11 circuit opinion about visa numbers

Merchant v Attorney General, 11 Circuit
461 F.3d 1375; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 21667

It states:

Apparently, the government’s only argument that Merchant had not satisfied
all of §1255(i)’s requirements is that the immigrant visa is not in hand. The
government argues that Merchant is not “eligible to receive an immigrant visa” (8 U.S.C. §1255(2)(A)), because his visa petition has not yet been approved by DHS and his visa is not in hand. We reject the government’s argument, because the statute clearly provides that an alien in Merchant’s shoes need only be “eligible” to receive the visa, not that he must have the visa in hand. See also 8 C.F.R. §245.10(b)(2) (providing that one prerequisite for eligibility for adjustment is that the alien be eligible for immigrant classification” (emphasis added).4
 
wom_ri said:
Merchant v Attorney General, 11 Circuit
461 F.3d 1375; 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 21667

It states:

Apparently, the government’s only argument that Merchant had not satisfied
all of §1255(i)’s requirements is that the immigrant visa is not in hand. The
government argues that Merchant is not “eligible to receive an immigrant visa” (8 U.S.C. §1255(2)(A)), because his visa petition has not yet been approved by DHS and his visa is not in hand. We reject the government’s argument, because the statute clearly provides that an alien in Merchant’s shoes need only be “eligible” to receive the visa, not that he must have the visa in hand. See also 8 C.F.R. §245.10(b)(2) (providing that one prerequisite for eligibility for adjustment is that the alien be eligible for immigrant classification” (emphasis added).4
Click to expand...


Reading the abstract it appears that here an immigrant visa was available. It was not at hand. Wonder what "at hand" really means.
 
AGC4ME said:
Reading the abstract it appears that here an immigrant visa was available. It was not at hand. Wonder what "at hand" really means.
Click to expand...

"at hand" here means a green card itself. Not sure if we can use this case.

The court, however, interpreted the statue in alien's favor.

"Section 1255(i)(2)(B) contains the requirement that an immigrant visa number be immediately available. We note that the literal language of §1255(i)(2)(B) is that “an immigrant visa is immediately available ....” However, both the Regulations and the BIA case law construe this language of §1255(i)(2)(B) as meaning that an immigrant visa number be immediately available to the alien. 8 C.F.R. §245.10(b)(2); Matter of Ho, 15 I&N. Dec. 692 (BIA 1976). This interpretation is reasonable; it avoids rendering 1255(i)(2)(A) superfluous. Thus, this language provides no support for the government’s argument that the immigrant visa must be approved and in hand for an alien to satisfy all the requirements of §1255(i)."

We should come up with good arguments to support our interpretation of the INA.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mohman said:
Thanks lazycis, I hvent had an interview, but I've written to Mrs Bush without a response. My congressmen and senator have been more responsive but say they really cant do much about the FBI.
one more thing someone suggested to me was calling the USCIS office in vermont and talking to a IO, but i dont know how to get past the automated messenger. Does anyone here know how to do that.
Also now i think I will file the lawsuit.
Click to expand...

Don't waste your time trying to call the Service Center. USCIS can't adjudicate your application till they don't have your full criminal background check completed. They will start moving only after a lawsuit is filed. Don't forget to include FBI because your case most likely is stuck in the blackhole called namecheck (done by FBI). You are appoaching now 2 years since you filed your application, many of the judges considered such delay unreasonable.
 
lazycis said:
Sounds like a plan. Check the last few pages on the forum, we've already discussed the same subject in details.
Click to expand...

This is what I added under the "PARTIES" section

Respondent Dr. Condoleezza Rice is the U.S. Secretary of State. This action is brought against her in her official capacity only, as well as her successors and assigns. She is generally charged with implementing U.S. foreign policy and is further authorized to delegate such powers and authority to subordinate employees of the Bureau of Consular Affairs (“BCA”) which is an agency within the Department of State. The BCA is responsible for the issuance of visas to foreign nationals for entry into the U.S. and is also responsible for tracking and allocation of visa numbers to foreign nationals.


We need to update the template on the wiki...:)
 
grinberg

In grinberg_v_swacina, judge says:
And even more compelling is the fact that Defendants have since approved the applications of the other members of the Grinberg family.

This is not true in many of the WOM cases. Can we state this difference in our MTD ?
 
wom_ri said:
In grinberg_v_swacina, judge says:
And even more compelling is the fact that Defendants have since approved the applications of the other members of the Grinberg family.

This is not true in many of the WOM cases. Can we state this difference in our MTD ?
Click to expand...

In Grinberg case the one person who was not approved had a hit against his name. I also had a hit against my name but I had to do discovery to find that out. In most cases Michael Cannon will not say whether the Plaintiffs have a hit or not so you can use that difference as your argument.
 
Hi lazycis,
I filed my N-400 at 2005,had FP at Sep,05, interviewed at 02/06.and of course,i passed that. Right now, still waiting for the oath Ceremony. But because my current name is way different than the name i just entered US JFK airport in their record, the system still showed my old name. so the interviewer asked me to sign those name change form through judicial oath and i did. I called USCIS few times, they either told me FBI doing background check or like today, waiting for FBI clearance reply.
I'm very frustrated now. Dont know what to do. and i dont know much things about law suit stuff. Should i get lawyer work on my case? and some people told me my case just like name check case, got stuck. What's WOM? cause i heard people told me i should file lawsuit WOM against USCIS.
I really need some help. Thank you.
 
applenew2 said:
Hi lazycis,
I filed my N-400 at 2005,had FP at Sep,05, interviewed at 02/06.and of course,i passed that. Right now, still waiting for the oath Ceremony. But because my current name is way different than the name i just entered US JFK airport in their record, the system still showed my old name. so the interviewer asked me to sign those name change form through judicial oath and i did. I called USCIS few times, they either told me FBI doing background check or like today, waiting for FBI clearance reply.
I'm very frustrated now. Dont know what to do. and i dont know much things about law suit stuff. Should i get lawyer work on my case? and some people told me my case just like name check case, got stuck. What's WOM? cause i heard people told me i should file lawsuit WOM against USCIS.
I really need some help. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Because you've had an interview, your case is fairly simple. The USCIS is required by law to make a decision on your N400 no later than 120 days after the interview. If you file a lawsuit, expect to receive an oath letter within a month or two. Your case is simple, it's called 1447b, but if you are not very comfortable with doing it yourself, you may hire a lawyer. It will cost you additional 2-3 thousands comparing to cost of doing it yourself ($350+mail expenses).

Here is a link to sample complaint for your lawsuit http://www.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16817&d=1186914549

Check also this page for more info about lawsuit preparation.
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/FBI_name_check
 
I looked up the sample complaint u gave me, the problem now i havent made any USCIS Infopass appointment, can I still file a lawsuit against them? and I havent called any FBI agents, would that be alrite? Do i have to go to court and talk to the judge? Scary T.T
 
Last edited by a moderator:
applenew2 said:
I looked up the sample complaint u gave me, the problem now i havent made any USCIS Infopass appointment, can I still file a lawsuit against them? and I havent called any FBI agents, would that be alrite? Do i have to go to court and talk to the judge? Scary T.T
Click to expand...

It's a sample complaint. In your case you have to show only that 120 days has been passed since the N400 interview. You will probably never face/talk the judge. In fact, the only thing you need to do is to file a complaint for 1447b case.
 
ah, that will be good. I dont know what to talk if i really have to face to the judge.XD I will try my best. Sure , i will file a complaint for 1447b case, Thank u so much for your help.
 
lazycis said:
There is some logic in using LC date, but it's no better than I-140 filing date. Injustice remains the same. If LC is long-pending and a person loses the job, s/he is at disadvantage comparing to somebody who got LC approved in a few months. Also, a person can get LC, wait for a year or so, file I-140 and get ahead of somebody who filed LC a day later but quickly filed I-140 after LC approval. I do not think it's fair.

We should definitely think about class action lawsuit to backdate our GCs or to waive/reduce 5 year permanent residency requirement when we apply for citizenship (8 USC 1427(a)).
Click to expand...

lazycis,
We should definitely explore this idea to backdate our GCs. I will be all over it and willing to spend. I am sure there will be plenty of souls like us who will join a class action law suit in a heartbeat.

I have spent nearly 4 years in Name Check black hole which caused a lot of mental agony. A lawsuit will give the USCIS/Govt an opportunity to right the wrong.

And you would be the most knowledgeable person here to lead this group.
 
Gc Will Be Required For Driver Licenses In Mi

I JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT THAT LAW THEY ARE TRYING TO PASS IN MICHIGAN.
OFFICE OF THE AUTTORNEY GENERAL ISSUED THE FOLLOWING "PERMANENT RESIDENCY REQUIRED FOR DRIVER LICENSE IN MI"

YOU CAN READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE HERE:
http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10286.htm

I WAS THINKING THAT IT COULD ALSO BE A GOOD THING SINCE WE CAN GO TO COURT AND TELL THE JUDGE THAT AUTTORNEY GENERAL IS HERE TELLING PEOPLE WAITING FOR AOS THAT YOU CANNOT DRIVE AND GO TO WORK BUT HE ALSO HAS DISCRETION FOR ACCELERATING THE NAME CHECK. SINCE WE ARE LEGALLY IN THE COUNTRY LET HIM ACCELERATE NAME CHECK AND MAKE US PERMANENT RESIDENTS

ANY COMMENTS ??
 
Houston Judge Sends Message To Uscis On Natz Delays

HOUSTON JUDGE SENDS MESSAGE TO USCIS ON NATZ DELAYS
Benders Immigration Bulletin has posted a really great mandamus decision by a federal district court judge in Houston ordering USCIS to adjudicate a naturalization case that has been delayed for nearly four years. Dan K. provides the money quote from Judge Rosenthal on the BIB page, but it's worth repeating:

This court orders as follows:

Within 14 days, the USCIS must order the FBI to expedite the name check on Abusadeh.

Within 60 days from the date the FBI completes the name check and reports the results to the USCIS, or by April 2, 2008, whichever is earlier, the USCIS must report to this court, in writing, as to whether the FBI has completed the name check on Abusadeh and reported the results to the USCIS. If not, the USCIS must report on the status of the name check and the reasons for the failure to complete it.

Within 30 days of receiving the report of the results of the name check from the FBI, the USCIS must decide Abusadeh's naturalization application.

If the decision is to grant the application, the USCIS must permit Abusadeh to be naturalized as a citizen within 30 days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top