March 2003 RD approved

S

sk2002sk

Registered Users (C)
Guys,

Rupnet shows an approval of RD in March 2003 ???!!! (under name - Shailey) Is it true or what?

Any expert comments?
 
I don't think this is correct info. Because this person applied for EAD on 11/11/2003 and to my guess his/her EAD got approved and this person updated info. on GC approved column.

So in short I don't believe it.
 
With us filling a law suite against USCIS, do you think that they are randomly picking up some recent cases and approving them so that they can proove in court that they are approving cases within a years time.

I am sure that USCIS might be monitoring these forums, and they might be aware of the law suite, and so they are processing some recent cases and also cases in jan through april of 2002, so that they can CYOB for the law suite.

How come we never heard such random cases been approved untill after the law suite was filled, and also how come we didn't hear lot of activity for jan-april 02 cases untill Rajiv started working on filling the law suite. Maybe to keep up with the holiday spirit or maybe because they can proove that the law suite has no basis.

Just thinking out loud.
 
Certain individual plaintiffs in their private capacity are seeking relief from the court in the lawsuit. A class has neither been identified by the court nor has it been granted.

Even the most uninformed lawyer in the justice department will be able to figure out that approving a few Mar./Apr. cases is unlikely to be seen by any self-respecting court as providing relief to the particular set of plaintiffs that brought the action. In fact, such conduct can serve to establish the exact opposite and can damage INS's defence.

It is more than likely that INS will attempt to shield this lawsuit from the public glare by quietly settling with plaintiffs by offering to approve their cases and providing some lip-service on the general I-485 processing situation as cover.
 
Or it may have the positive effect that the lawsuit filed on behalf of religious workers (I think) had. BCIS may devote more resources to reduce the backlog of 485 applications at the expense of other applications

Nothing wrong in hoping and trying for the best
 
Not to start another debate, but it bears mentioning that the Religious Category had a sunset provision in the law. Pending its renewal, for fear of incurring the wrath of the heavens, INS was asked by our 'evangelical' administration to allocate as many resources as they may have, to approve religious category cases. The absence of such religious fervor in pushing employment-based I-485s does not surprise me one bit!
 
I am afraid that the administration probably is not interested in the speedy adjudication EB cases due to obvious reasons. So, chances are that BCIS will try to figure out a way to slow down the process further or maintain the same pace by pointing to inadequate resources. Since BCIS attorneys are not prepared to defend a law suit like this, they probably will lure BCIS to settle the case by offering as little incentives as it can, but sufficient to turn away the plaintiffs from the law suit such as approving their petitions. As the result, although once the class action status is granted, the suit is unlikely to be dismissed, the real danger is that plaintiffs may lose their interest in the case subsequently.
just 'n fair
 
as much as i know, they'll certainly be worried about the law suit. Contempt of court may be not be a lucrative proposition for them, and I believe no politicians can cover them from judicial action. My guess is that they'll surely save their rear from burning hard.
just 'n fair
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top