National Security Clearance for citizenship

In my spouse's case in Sept this year, we filed a SR after 90 days from interview date. Similar reply came. This is a routine reply. We contacted the Senator after receiving reply for SR. No joy. We were gearing up for filing case under 1447(b). On 124th day she got OL.

Your presence is required in NYC for filing the case in the federal court. My advise is to make an Infopass on reaching NYC b4 filing the case. Of late i note that there are very few cases not adjudicated within 120 days. Your case will be settled soon.
 
cafeconleche, I'm following your story because the USCIS is close to busting its own claimed "processing time" on my case.

It seems to me that the processing times the USCIS publishes are so much hot air. It takes us 5 months to process a N400... except that we have up to 90 days after your interview to make a decision... except that if we ask for more evidence we have an additional 60 days after you respond to make a decision... except that blah blah whatever... The only hard deadline is the 120-day one.

Now, from what I can tell, I will be able to send a service request sometime at the end of this month. (It will have been more than 5 months since initial filing, more than 90 days since my interview and more than 60 days since my response to the post-interview RFE.) I take it that this can be done through the web site. For those who've done it? Good idea to do it online, bad idea, does not matter?
 
Thanks for the input, guys.

So I have to be in NY to file the case? It can't be done, at least at first, by post? Also, why is an infopass appointment better than a service request? I feel I'll get the same crap in person, and I will only be wasting my time going all the way to Garden City (and now, it turns out, my IO has been transferred to the new Holtsville office way up in Long Island- does this mean it's my new DO??).

I do hope they make a decision before or around the 120th day, madh4. Either way I guess I'll be heading back to NY. I was asking earlier if an address change to CA would help because then I'd be able to file in CA, but I didn't get any feedback about 1) whether there be a new interview and IO and 2) whether the 120 day period would change. I take it I would have to wait another 3 months to establish CA residency?

Anyway, I am keeping my fingers crossed that things will move soon, but I am somehow pessimistic about it since they always say there is no time limit for background checks to be completed.
 
I've written to the Ombudsman and I've requested a packet from the court to file a lawsuit. I also want to do the FOIA thing with the FBI to see if I get a no-record result. How exactly do I do it? Just a regular FOIA request in writing to the FBI's records division, or should I specify something related to naturalization?
 
cafeconleche said:
I've written to the Ombudsman and I've requested a packet from the court to file a lawsuit. I also want to do the FOIA thing with the FBI to see if I get a no-record result. How exactly do I do it? Just a regular FOIA request in writing to the FBI's records division, or should I specify something related to naturalization?
Click to expand...

Cafe,

The FOIA is a waste of time and govt resources in my view, on average it takes about a year to get the paperwork from the FBI office. You know why? We have a lot of people who unfortunately, are obsessed with the FBI, so they are swamped. It is possible that as soon as you sue USCIS, your case will be adjudicated and the FBI will still have to respond, unless you notify them of your change of mind.
 
What's your reason for wanting FBI FOIA? It won't serve as a replacement to the FBI namecheck process initiated by USCIS.
 
I read somewhere here that it could help my 1447b lawsuit if it came back as no record and I could show that the delay is unnecessary.
 
cafeconleche said:
I read somewhere here that it could help my 1447b lawsuit if it came back as no record and I could show that the delay is unnecessary.
Click to expand...

Cafe,

Let as assume for a moment, your case is stuck due to something discovered by the FBI during routine background check, that information which the FBI deem to be critical to US national security regarding your person won't be revealed even through FOIA. So, in my view, you are over-analyzing this issue. Contrary to what Bob said previously about showing good faith effort to resolve this issue before resorting to a legal action, their own (USCIS) administrative manual clearly advise that you can seek a remedy through a district court. Just sue dude, will at least force someone in the DO to look at the case at the urging of US attorney, who are fed up by having to address these N400 cases, because they are a nuisance in their view, in comparison to large criminal elements. Of course, the US Attorney can't just ignore them as they fall within his scope of responsibilities.
 
cafeconleche said:
I read somewhere here that it could help my 1447b lawsuit if it came back as no record and I could show that the delay is unnecessary.
Click to expand...

By filing 1447, you're already showing that the adjudication delay is beyond the 120 day limit. Considering that there's an additional delay in obtaining FBI FOIA request and it's minimal value in demonstrating just cause, documented past correspondence with USCIS is more important in showing that you have tried unsuccessfully in having your case adjudicated in due time.
 
Al Southner said:
Contrary to what Bob said previously about showing good faith effort to resolve this issue before resorting to a legal action...
Click to expand...

With any type of legal action the plaintiff should be able to show what was done in good faith to resolve the issue. If a plaintiff sues someone and there's no indication that the plaintiff ever tried to contact the defendant beforehand, the lawsuit would look pretty worthless in the eyes of a DA and judge.
 
Got my FOIPA request results, and, surprise surprise, they could not identify responsive main file records. So, I don't know what's holding up my background check. The letter also says they cannot confirm or deny my placement on any watch list. So maybe I'm on a list, but don't know it. Why? No idea.

I got my summons too, so I'm going to serve it tomorrow. This is getting exciting.
 
So, the defendants need to answer the judge by the 18th of this month, and I haven't heard anything from the US attorney, so I'm going to call today. Any tips on what to say? What if they ask for more time, or say that the FBI checks are still pending and that there is no way around it, etc. Essentially, if they argue against my claim that CIS and the FBI are not doing their jobs properly, what can I say?
 
I just spoke to the AUSA, Ronald Kish. He was nice, but hadn't had a chance to look at the case yet. He will now, and get back to me.
 
So, I got the letter from CIS in the post. It seems that it's a request for additional documents, but it feels like a second interview. It says to ask for ISO CINOTTI on one sheet, and the reason is given as COMPLETE N400 INTERVIEW: BRING PASSPORTS AND GREEN CARD. There's another form asking for these things:

-Tax returns from 09 if parents were still providing financial support
-W2s from 2009 and 2010
-Proof that I have resided in NY since June 2010 with stuff like bank statements, utility bills, lease agreements, etc.
-Driver's licence

When I spoke to the AUSA, he said they needed proof I was a NY resident. I guess I understand the things they are asking for for that, but since June 2010? I arrived in December 2009, applied in March 2010, was interviewed in August 2010, and I have waited since then. I did go to CA for about 4 months from September to December 2010 because I didn't have a job, but I only went to see my family and be with my mother as she had just lost her father. I also filed the lawsuit from there, but I did include my main address in NY and said I was TEMPORARILY in CA until further notice. a few weeks ago I submitted a change of address since I moved to another place in NY. Could this be why they are suspicious? A reason to ask for more time due to jurisdictional issues?

As for my parents' tax returns, I claimed before that as student abroad, I was their dependent the whole time, all the way until 2009. I sent all those tax returns except for 09 since my mom had not filed yet. So, that could be why they are asking for that, but that was not one of the issues the AUSA mentioned needed to be cleared up.

So, my question now is, have I shot myself in the foot by agreeing to go in with these documents? I feel like I want to call the AUSA tomorrow and say that I feel that CIS is probing to find a reason either to stall or deny my application, and that I do not have to agree to a second interview. He mentioned it wasn't really an interview, but that I would have to go in person. Can't I fax or post things to them? I feel like they're pushing me around again.

So, would it look bad if I said I don't feel good about this, and that, again, they had time to get ALL this information before and didn't for 4 months despite my repeated calls, requests for senator intervention, a service request, etc. AND, they did not get in touch after I filed the lawsuit in December, and only responded when I took the first step. Can they say that they offered to clear things up but I then went back on my word, or will the judge see that I had every right to change my mind. I did mention to the AUSA that if I didn't like the tone and demands of the CIS letter, that I would call back and talk to him.

I also want to ask for court filing fees and incidental costs (photocopying, postage, going AGAIN to Garden City, etc.)

Please let me know where I stand now. I hate these godforsaken bureaucrats.
 
cafeconleche said:
So, I got the letter from CIS in the post. It seems that it's a request for additional documents, but it feels like a second interview. It says to ask for ISO CINOTTI on one sheet, and the reason is given as COMPLETE N400 INTERVIEW: BRING PASSPORTS AND GREEN CARD. There's another form asking for these things:

-Tax returns from 09 if parents were still providing financial support
-W2s from 2009 and 2010
-Proof that I have resided in NY since June 2010 with stuff like bank statements, utility bills, lease agreements, etc.
-Driver's licence

When I spoke to the AUSA, he said they needed proof I was a NY resident. I guess I understand the things they are asking for for that, but since June 2010? I arrived in December 2009, applied in March 2010, was interviewed in August 2010, and I have waited since then. I did go to CA for about 4 months from September to December 2010 because I didn't have a job, but I only went to see my family and be with my mother as she had just lost her father. I also filed the lawsuit from there, but I did include my main address in NY and said I was TEMPORARILY in CA until further notice. a few weeks ago I submitted a change of address since I moved to another place in NY. Could this be why they are suspicious? A reason to ask for more time due to jurisdictional issues?

As for my parents' tax returns, I claimed before that as student abroad, I was their dependent the whole time, all the way until 2009. I sent all those tax returns except for 09 since my mom had not filed yet. So, that could be why they are asking for that, but that was not one of the issues the AUSA mentioned needed to be cleared up.

So, my question now is, have I shot myself in the foot by agreeing to go in with these documents? I feel like I want to call the AUSA tomorrow and say that I feel that CIS is probing to find a reason either to stall or deny my application, and that I do not have to agree to a second interview. He mentioned it wasn't really an interview, but that I would have to go in person. Can't I fax or post things to them? I feel like they're pushing me around again.

So, would it look bad if I said I don't feel good about this, and that, again, they had time to get ALL this information before and didn't for 4 months despite my repeated calls, requests for senator intervention, a service request, etc. AND, they did not get in touch after I filed the lawsuit in December, and only responded when I took the first step. Can they say that they offered to clear things up but I then went back on my word, or will the judge see that I had every right to change my mind. I did mention to the AUSA that if I didn't like the tone and demands of the CIS letter, that I would call back and talk to him.

I also want to ask for court filing fees and incidental costs (photocopying, postage, going AGAIN to Garden City, etc.)

Please let me know where I stand now. I hate these godforsaken bureaucrats.
Click to expand...

Does the letter give a specific date when you have to come and bring these extra documents?

IMO, you shot yourself in the foot by filing the lawsuit from California and saying something about a "temporary" CA address in the filing; that was a terribly daft thing to do. I am pretty sure that is the reason for their request of these additional documents in relation to your residency. You should have filed a lawsuit from NY.

By law, the final adjudication of your case must be done by the DO responsible for your current place of residence. If you had moved to CA permanently (and they might suspect that you have), the law would require them to transfer your application to CA and its processing would have to be completed there.
 
I didn't actually file suit in CA. I just did it FROM there, in Federal District Court for Eastern NY, which covers Brooklyn, my permanent place of residence. I was very clear in the letter that I had gone to CA to take care of some family matters, and that I was returning to NY soon. I am working in NY now, and I can get a letter from my previous landlord that I was a resident in her flat. I never worked in CA.

But, my point is, Vorpal is saying I do not need to submit to an interview. Does that also mean they can't ask for more documents since they waited so long, and should make a decision based only on what I have given them, and as if they didn't cause a delay? Because, if they hadn't waited this long, my residency would not even have been called into question since things would have been done last October or November, and I only went to CA from Dec-Jan.
 
cafeconleche said:
I didn't actually file suit in CA. I just did it FROM there, in Federal District Court for Eastern NY, which covers Brooklyn, my permanent place of residence. I was very clear in the letter that I had gone to CA to take care of some family matters, and that I was returning to NY soon. I am working in NY now, and I can get a letter from my previous landlord that I was a resident in her flat. I never worked in CA.

But, my point is, Vorpal is saying I do not need to submit to an interview. Does that also mean they can't ask for more documents since they waited so long, and should make a decision based only on what I have given them, and as if they didn't cause a delay? Because, if they hadn't waited this long, my residency would not even have been called into question since things would have been done last October or November, and I only went to CA from Dec-Jan.
Click to expand...

I did understand from your original post that you filed the lawsuit in NY but did it from CA. It was still exceedingly daft of you. It does not matter how clearly you explained in your cover letter that you were in CA temporarily, you still should not have done that. You should have filed the lawsuit from NY. As it is, you clearly red-flagged your own application. The USCIS could reasonably wonder just how temporary your move to CA was, and if it was really temporary, why you could not have waited to return to NY before filing the lawsuit instead of giving them an out-of-state address. I am pretty sure that you are now dealing with the consequences of that fact and that is why they want to see more proof of NY residency.

Also, you did not answer my question: did the letter requesting you to bring these additional documents specify a particular date on which you should do it? If not, did it give a deadline?

Also, did I understand correctly, that as of Feb 2011, your parents still have not filed their 2009 tax return?
 
cafeconleche said:
But, my point is, Vorpal is saying I do not need to submit to an interview. Does that also mean they can't ask for more documents since they waited so long, and should make a decision based only on what I have given them, and as if they didn't cause a delay? Because, if they hadn't waited this long, my residency would not even have been called into question since things would have been done last October or November, and I only went to CA from Dec-Jan.
Click to expand...

I am not at all sure that Vorpal is correct about the second interview; you should perhaps consult a lawyer about it. I do remember reading about quite a few cases where a second interview was necessary.

However, USCIS certainly CAN request additional evidence after the interview and they do it ALL THE TIME. In my opinion, you do not have a good excuse for not complying with their request. The ball is now in your court, as on the USCIS side the case has started moving and it is now up to you to make the next step in moving the case along. So I suggest that you collect as much documents related to your NY residency as you can and bring it as they request. If you can make your parents file their late 2009 tax return quickly, you should.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top