Employment based immigration backlog petition

Rajiv,

We are contemplating class action law suit ('Writ of Mandamus') against USCIS.

Please follow the below mentioned discussion thread about the same issue:

backlog delay sued BCIS and got approved case thru marriage, good example
Latest successful I-485 backlog law suit

Also planning to contact AILF legal action center about the same. Couple of weeks back I e-mailed them requesting appointment to discuss about class action law suit but no response yet. Today I'll mail our petition with all the signatures to AILF legal action center along with teleconference request to discuss about class action law suit against CIS.


Please provide your thoughts about class action law suit (writ of mandamus) against USCIS.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Slow Down folks. This is a different situation

Originally posted by Edison
Rajiv,

We are contemplating class action law suit ('Writ of Mandamus') against USCIS.

Please follow the below mentioned discussion thread about the same issue:

backlog delay sued BCIS and got approved case thru marriage, good example
Latest successful I-485 backlog law suit

Also planning to contact AILF legal action center about the same. Couple of weeks back I e-mailed them requesting appointment to discuss about class action law suit but no response yet. Today I'll mail our petition with all the signatures to AILF legal action center along with teleconference request to discuss about class action law suit against CIS.


Please provide your thoughts about class action law suit (writ of mandamus) against USCIS.
Click to expand...


In DV cases, delay of 485 can mean loss of green card. Not the same thing as our cases. Sorry.
 
Slow Down folks. This is a different situation

Originally posted by Edison
Rajiv,

We are contemplating class action law suit ('Writ of Mandamus') against USCIS.

Please follow the below mentioned discussion thread about the same issue:

backlog delay sued BCIS and got approved case thru marriage, good example
Latest successful I-485 backlog law suit

Also planning to contact AILF legal action center about the same. Couple of weeks back I e-mailed them requesting appointment to discuss about class action law suit but no response yet. Today I'll mail our petition with all the signatures to AILF legal action center along with teleconference request to discuss about class action law suit against CIS.


Please provide your thoughts about class action law suit (writ of mandamus) against USCIS.
Click to expand...


In DV cases, delay of 485 can mean loss of green card. Not the same thing as our cases. Sorry.

I see no harm in filing a Mandamus/Declaratory class action suit. But frankly, I know better. Chances of sucess are not great. But, this would certainly wake up the govt. and force them to at least acknowledge (and just MAY be address) the problem. Our team has no problem going to court if that is what you want.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Rajiv,

The delay in EB cases could also lead to loss of green card, as the people start loosing job...if the CIS drag the whole thing to 5 yrs or longer, most people would NOT even work in the similar job discreiption.

We are willing to do anything just to wake up the darn CIS, they cannot treat us like this.

GUYS How should we procede with it?
 
What "lz25888" is saying is true. In this dynamic world of America, lot of people are loosing their jobs because of bad economy and if bcis had processed all the applications in time, that would not have been the case and people wouldn't have to leave the country jobless. And their future would have been totally different.
So I think this type can be the candidate for "Writ of Mandamus".
We can give it a try, if not successful, atleast we can get some more insights that will help to arrive at a better solution.
 
Not quite

Losing a job due to delay is not the same thing as becoming ineligible through operation of law.

I am always willing to try anything (as long as it is legal). But we must go in with our eyes open, gang.
 
Do we have reasonable legal basis for the law suit???

Rajiv -

From your experience, do you think there is ANY legal basis for
suing the BCIS for delays in processing.

Or is the discussion along this line, just a waste of time.

Thanks
MJ
 
Re: Do we have reasonable legal basis for the law suit???

Originally posted by mj_no_1
Rajiv -

From your experience, do you think there is ANY legal basis for
suing the BCIS for delays in processing.

Or is the discussion along this line, just a waste of time.

Thanks
MJ
Click to expand...

A few months ago, a user group from CA had requested the same answer. I did not save the research but the answer was: courts will not interfere as a normal rule. Nevertheless, the biggest advantage of a law suit like this is attention. Note though, we,as lawyers have to be careful. We cannot file frivolous or baseless law suits. The courts sanction such behaviour.

Bottomline: if you folks are truly into it, I can have someone look into it. But we will need 10-15 committed people amongst you. I do not know if we can do it free of cost to all involved, but I can try. I will need to speak with our team. Of course, AILF is a good organization. If you folks want to approach them, I have no problem with it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Slow Down folks. This is a different situation

True we cannot file Mandamus/Declaratory class action suit for processing GC, but we can file suit for relief from continuing to file for EAD/AP due to INS's shortcoming. To extend EAD validity beyond the one year period to multiple years or for the life time of the adjustee status.

The key question here is budget appropriations. Out of the Billion or so dollars that we pay regularly while our cases are processed. Most of it is taken out and handed to other departments as operating budget. and a VERY small amount given to BCIS to run its main operation.

This is definitely taking money under false promises, not to mention milking money from immigrants to pay for other services and not provide any form of relief to the immigrants themselves.
 
IMHO, I think there is a legal basis per section 201 of INA which states that at least 140,000 EB based greencard will be issued annually. Using a FOIA request, one can find out the actual number for 2002 and 2003, which I would wager is a lot less than 140,000.

Is this not non-compliance of the law ? If not why is it in the law ? Only if a category is oversubscribed can inordinate delays be acceptable.
 
180 day processing time law

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:SN02586:@@@L&summ2=m&

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S.2586
Title: A bill to reduce the backlog in the processing of immigration benefit applications and to make improvements to infrastructure necessary for the effective provision of immigration services, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] (introduced 5/18/2000) Cosponsors: 12
Latest Major Action: 5/18/2000 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Note: On September 28, 2000, the Senate incorporated the text of S. 2586 into S.Amdt. 4275 to S. 2045. S. 2045 became Public Law 106-313.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:S.2045:


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:SN02045:@@@L&summ2=m&

Title II: Immigration Services and Infrastructure Improvements - Immigration Services and Infrastructure Improvements Act of 2000 - Authorizes the Attorney General to take necessary steps to: (1) reduce the immigration backlog; and (2) make infrastructure improvements to effectively provide immigration services. Authorizes appropriations. Sets forth related reporting requirements.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:SN02045:@@@X
10/3/2000 7:13pm:
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
10/3/2000:
Cleared for White House.
10/5/2000:
Presented to President.
10/17/2000:
Signed by President.
10/17/2000:
Became Public Law No: 106-313.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Follow the below mentioned link and click on "TEXT" next to S.2045 to view the below mentioned GPO page

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d106:S.2045:




SEC. 202. <<NOTE: 8 USC 1571.>> PURPOSES.

(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this title are to--
(1) provide the Immigration and Naturalization Service with
the mechanisms it needs to eliminate the current backlog in the
processing of immigration benefit applications within 1 year
after enactment of this Act and to maintain the elimination of
the backlog in future years; and
(2) provide for regular congressional oversight of the
performance of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in
eliminating the backlog and processing delays in immigration
benefits adjudications.

(b) Policy.--It <<NOTE: Applicability. Deadline.>> is the sense of
Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application
should be completed not later than 180 days after the initial filing of
the application, except that a petition for a nonimmigrant visa under
section 214(c) of
[[Page 114 STAT. 1263]]

the Immigration and Nationality Act should be processed not later than
30 days after the filing of the petition.
 
Re: Re: Do we have reasonable legal basis for the law suit???

Originally posted by operations
A few months ago, a user group from CA had requested the same answer. I did not save the research but the answer was: courts will not interfere as a normal rule. Nevertheless, the biggest advantage of a law suit like this is attention. Note though, we,as lawyers have to be careful. We cannot file frivolous or baseless law suits. The courts sanction such behaviour.

Bottomline: if you folks are truly into it, I can have someone look into it. But we will need 10-15 committed people amongst you. I do not know if we can do it free of cost to all involved, but I can try. I will need to speak with our team. Of course, AILF is a good organization. If you folks want to approach them, I have no problem with it.
Click to expand...


Thanks, Rajiv.

As always I'm there for all our efforts towards this and I'm sure that we can get lot of people.
 
I'm in!!!

I don't mind contributing reasonable amount of time and money into tihs. I just think that it is time to get their attention.

Several questions:
1) Would a more specific class be able to make stronger case? (people whose cases pending >18 or 12 months for instance)

2) What would these 10-15 "committed people" need to do? Again, I might be interested in volunteering for this. Can we have more details?
 
Originally posted by DaoMingTze
I'm in!!!

I don't mind contributing reasonable amount of time and money into tihs. I just think that it is time to get their attention.

Several questions:
1) Would a more specific class be able to make stronger case? (people whose cases pending >18 or 12 months for instance)

2) What would these 10-15 "committed people" need to do? Again, I might be interested in volunteering for this. Can we have more details?
Click to expand...

1. Yes. The cases that have been pending longest are the best plaintiffs/petitioners.

2. Not much. Just provide documents, affidavits and support as needed. These folks have to be fired up and not just be dead weght for other to carry.
 
Thanks!

I'll try to do whatever to help.

After 25+ months sitting around like stupid, this is the first time I feel like I can fire back! It's a good feeling.

Once this gets running, I guess I will have to notify my "official" attorneys for this. I know they will try to sedate me saying "are you nuts or what?" Like when I asked senator's help. Although they were right that contacting senator's help didn't get me anywhere.
 
Count me in!!

I would also like to volunteer toward this effort. Please count me in as well.

Having tried all other options like congressman/senator, this law suit looks the only available alternative.

Thanks
MJ
 
Dianne Feinstein's letter - Re: 180 day processing time law

Originally posted by Edison
S.2586
Title: A bill to reduce the backlog in the processing of immigration benefit applications and to make improvements to infrastructure necessary for the effective provision of immigration services, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] (introduced 5/18/2000) Cosponsors: 12
Latest Major Action: 5/18/2000 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on
Note: On September 28, 2000, the Senate incorporated the text of S. 2586 into S.Amdt. 4275 to S. 2045. S. 2045 became Public Law 106-313.
...
Click to expand...
Dianne Feinstein mentioned it in her letter to ngadhia.
Reply recieved from senator Dianne Feinstein

July 30, 2003


Dear Mr. ngadhia

Thank you for taking the time to write to me about problems with the Bureau of Citizenship
and Immigration Services (BCIS). I have read your letter and welcome the opportunity to respond.

In 2000, I introduced and Congress enacted the "Immigration Services and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2000." The Act required the Department of Justice to issue a report to Congress on the extent of the immigration and naturalization backlogs and the adequacy of the agency's automated systems to manage and reduce its pending workload. The report did not address all of my concerns, however, and BCIS has not issued an update to its efforts to reduce processing delays. Please know that I will continue to raise your concerns with Eduardo Aguirre, Director of BCIS.

Thank you again for writing. Should you have any further questions regarding this issue, please feel free to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841.

Best Regards.



Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by operations
:) Novel theory. I think we can argue it. Why not.
Click to expand...

Rajiv,

It is very heartening to note that you feel we have a foot to stand on. The way I look at it, we should present our cases thus, we are defrauded of our money by INS when they take our money for services but DO NOT provide us with those services. This money is misappropriated in the budget by outsourcing it to the various other branches of immigration which are not cash producing. So basically the INS treats 485's as a cash cow.

Going by the above logic, a reasonable point could also be made that this attitude is responsible for the delays in processing AOS because the delay is an inducement to ensure that other government programs are funded, despite the Senate and Congress passing a LAW into the effect that all immigrants are to be granted relief within 6 months of application.

While I realise that we cannot dictate to the government how to budget its money, by filing this lawsuit we do the following things:
1. Draw much needed attention to our cause internally within the BCIS (Basically be such a pain in their ass that they would rather get rid of us rather than continue the fight).
2. If we win the lawsuit and get the BCIS to grant us long term EAD's it takes away the inducement to delay our 485's since we are no longer a cashcow.
3. Due to #2 above, the senate when asked for additional money to support border patrol operations, (thanks to the cash cow running dry), will ask the tough questions like why aren't applications processed faster!

Finally a heart felt thanks for your interest and help that you are providing immigrants like us! We truly appreciate it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top