NEEDSOLUTION...Here is the SOLUTION

[Publicus]

NEEDSOLUTION...The Only Background check USCIS does for Naturalization application

How are you Sir?

My name is Augustus Publicus. I am offering to help you to file a Mandmaus case for only $5,000.

OK! I am just kidding.

The object of my introductory joke is to show you that you have to keep enjoying life while you are dealing with these tyrant delays. You must not let this issue stop your life.

I truly understand your case. I am in the same situation. My case was filed in 2002 and am still waiting. But I've done something about it. I sued the bastards (by myself) and feel greatly good about it. I am confident I will prevail in my case. In the process of dealing with USCIS, I've done a lot of reading and a lot of research. In addition to spending endless amounts of time in forums like this one and others. I have a very good knowledge vis-a-vis immigration matters, especially naturalization.

You must first not feel terrible about your arrest for domestic violence. This is America and not the Soviet Union. People are not guilty unless proven otherwise by a COURT OF LAW. Not a peace officer. Not a Police Officer, and definitely NOT by an immigration officer. USCIS CANNOT deny your case based on this arrest. They can only deny a case if there is a proven record of an "aggravated felony conviction" That is it. USCIS (and I know some may disagree) should not even ask you about the arrest specifics. and according to the law you should not answer their questions. The only thing they can ask about the case is: Why were you arrested? What was the outcome? I was in the US Army and got arrested once by an MP. When asked about it, I was asked to divulge these two pieces of information: Why? And what was the verdict?

Now let's get back to the other stuff. There are three kinds of background checks made for Citizenship applicants:

1. FBI Fingerprint (FD258) Ident against NCIC database - this has a vaildity of 18 months. Any applicant can call FBI NCIC (Clarksburg, WV) at 304-625-3878 to find out if his/her fingerprint ident. result has been sent back to USCIS. Work through various voice prompt at this phone number to talk to a live representative. The results of this check are normally returned within 24 hours for person with no criminal records or outstanding warrants. No hit is termed "NO IDENT" in FBI's jargon. An FOIPA request (with FD258/fingerprints) would reveal if an ident. record exist or not.

2. FBI Name Check against Central Records System (CRS) - this check basically means to find out if the applicant has ever been subject/target of any FBI investigation. There is no documented validity period for this check. This check can take anywhere from 1 day to 1 year. No hit is termed "NO RECORD" in FBI's jargon. A FOIPA request would reveal if a record exists or not. FBI may not disclose full details but at least tell you if a record exist. Also, presence of a record does not mean that it is something negative.
To know if the name check has been completed or not, an applicant can send an email to: FBInncp@ic.fbi.gov and include all their personal information such as name, date of birth, Alien #, SSN, place of birth, address, telephone number etc...Because FBI has been overwhelmed with requests, it may take a long time to receive an answer. But in my opinion while the applicants are waiting for their case to be completed, they can wait on other related things.

3. IBIS (done by USCIS themselves) - this check has validity of 35 days - this check is against IBIS (maintained by USCPC - Customs and Border Patrol) using applicant's full name and date of birth (without place or country of birth). This check is done by USCIS staff on the computer terminals connected to IBIS. A no hit is termed "IBIS OK" in BCIS' jargon. An "IBIS DNR" (Does Not Relate) is when a match exists but does not relate to the applicant, which is, in other worlds, a no hit as well. IBIS is exempt from FOIPA requests, that is, a person cannot use FOIPA to find out if his/her name is in IBIS.

There is NO CIA check for N-400 applicants. Let me repeat this: There is NO CIA check for N-400 applicants. CIA check is done for I-485, Amnesty and other applicants; other than N-400 and N-600. For CIA check the USCIS sends applicant's G-325 (Biographic Information Form) copy to CIA.

In my case, I had to file a G-325B which is filed by all aliens serving in the United States Military and which sent to the Fort Meade in Maryland where the NSA has its headquarters. In my case USCIS is using this excuse to unlawfully delay my case, although my military background check has been cleared twice. This background check is good for 15 months.

So in your case Needsolution, I would say: your FBI name check has been cleared. Your fingerprint check has been cleared. Therefore USCIS has no excuse to delay your case. And first of all, they have no right to delay it whether the FBI check is done or not. The statute states 120 days after an interview, and it should be 120 days.

You should keep an email of the inquiry on your name check status and also file a FOIA/PA request with the FBI if you haven't done it yet. But I am confident your file is clean, otherwise your case would have been denied by now, you arrested and maybe put under removal procedures. I think it's your arrest that is holding your case. Some USCIS officers are really xenophobe and take some things personally. I hate to say it, but it's true.

You asked about filing a mandamus. I'd say: circumvent the delay by asking the judge to decide the naturalization case. Mandamus will only issue an order for USCIS to act on your case: it does not guarantee acceptance. Acting on a case may mean issuing a second interview letter, a fingerprint notice, or some other trivial act. You must be very careful about what you are asking the court to do. You must specify that you want the adjudication of your application. This is why I say: Go ahead and file a petition for naturalization hearing pursuant to 8 USC 1447b and 1421c. In the relief part of your case ask the court to take jurisdiction over the case and declare you as a citizen of the United States. Usually USCIS runs and adjudicates the case after the plaintiffs file the case with the court.

If you need examples of court cases, send me a private message with your email address and I will forward them to you. Also you may use PACER to find cases through the court system. However you must apply for a password and it usually takes two weeks to get one. I have a load of cases that are sufficient to understand the process and I have no problem sharing them with anybody on this board.

For your information, I filed my case by myself. My reasons are that I want to be in total control of my case. When it comes to my future, I am in control of my destiny. I don't want to keep begging a lawyer to send the case by october 15 for instance, just to find out it's not ready, or he is out of town etc... This way, I am in charge. Now if my case goes to trial (which I keep in mind) I might hire an attorney. One must be smart enough to know when they need help. But filing the lawsuit with the court is easy if you follow the rules. Again, I am not putting down lawyers. Many of them are great people and without them, USCIS would have started internment camps a long time ago. I just chose to take a different route. This way when I am feeling down about my case, I just start doing some research, prepare a motion, or write a letter to the court, then I feel better. I may never send any of these documents, but taking action makes me feel better. You get the picture.

I hope I helped clear up some of the ambiguity in your file. If you or any other members have any questions, feel free to contact me. Also if you need examples of cases, I will email them to you.

Good luck my friend.

Publicus

 

[ocworker]

It is an excellent post. I did not know n400 would need IBIS check too. No wonder the interview officer told me there was a "background" check pending on my case which it had to be done by USCIS (and I was confused why USCIS would check my background, rather than FBI).

Now, it all makes sense to me. I think my name check from FBI was cleared at the time of interview, however, the IBIS check was not.

When USCIS mentions about "background check", which one (FBI name check vs IBIS check) do they mean?

 

[sobelle]

Name check

Great post and informations! Can you specify what do you mean by :
FBI may not disclose full details but at least tell you if a record exist. Also, presence of a record does not mean that it is something
negative.
Dou you have any examples!! And how do we know if there is a record or not? Thanks a lot. I learned so much in this forum

 

[truckensafely]

I was told by INS to wait 5 years after my "Domesic Voilance" case was closed. The final charge was Public Nuisance. I was denied citezenship based on that.

 

[ocworker]

I was told by INS to wait 5 years after my "Domesic Voilance" case was closed. The final charge was Public Nuisance. I was denied citezenship based on that.

i think your case is different. you were charged and i think the other posted was arrested but his case was dismissed (i guess no charge was in place??)

i am sorry for your outcome

 

[Publicus]

Great post and informations! Can you specify what do you mean by :
FBI may not disclose full details but at least tell you if a record exist. Also, presence of a record does not mean that it is something
negative.
Dou you have any examples!! And how do we know if there is a record or not? Thanks a lot. I learned so much in this forum

In case there is an investigative file, by law FBI has only a duty to tell you: You have a record on file. They are not required to provide you with details. The Freedom of Information and Privacy Act protects the government privilege to withhold information if it can jeopardize an investigation. However, you may challenge this through the court system if you think that the information they are withholding is not critical. Of course if the FBI has a criminal record on file, I am sure the applicant already knows about it.

But most applicants receive a NO Record response, which is good to use in a court room. Everyone with a pending name check should file a FOIA request with the FBI and keep the response in their file. That's how you know if there is or not a record matched to your name at the FBI indexes.

 

[Publicus]

When USCIS mentions about "background check", which one (FBI name check vs IBIS check) do they mean?

It can mean all of them. USCIS officers are notorious for mixing up nomenclatures. There are two FBI checks:

1) criminal background check using applicants' fingerprints. Quickly done.

2) The FBI's "name check" which may take longer.

I am guessing that they usually mean the second one.

 

[PP4U]

Great post but I still would like to know a small detail...

Publicus, Great post! Thanks for sharing your knowledge. However, just a quick question for you or anyone who knows the answer: Although, I have no worries about my background, I am still curious if the background check for naturalization (fingerprint, name check, etc) is restricted only in the USA or also this proceeding is done in your country of origin? (I had my name cleared when I got my green card and since then I've been living in the US.)

 

[needsolution]

But I am confident your file is clean, otherwise your case would have been denied by now.

You say that you are confident that my file is clean otherwise my case would have been denied by now. How do you come to this conclusion? Can you explain this in depth please? Does USCIS always deny firstly the deniable files early and then leave the clean files to later?

You were arrested and maybe put under removal procedures. I think it's your arrest that is holding your case.

Why do you think that this arrest is holding my case? This arrest took place several years ago and the charges were dropped.

You asked about filing a mandamus. I'd say: circumvent the delay by asking the judge to decide the naturalization case. Mandamus will only issue an order for USCIS to act on your case: it does not guarantee acceptance. Acting on a case may mean issuing a second interview letter, a fingerprint notice, or some other trivial act. You must be very careful about what you are asking the court to do. You must specify that you want the adjudication of your application. This is why I say: Go ahead and file a petition for naturalization hearing pursuant to 8 USC 1447b and 1421c. In the relief part of your case ask the court to take jurisdiction over the case and declare you as a citizen of the United States. Usually USCIS runs and adjudicates the case after the plaintiffs file the case with the court.

I have spoken to a few attorneys. The attorneys all want to file mandamus rather than filing petition for naturalization hearing. They are not familiar or do not want to file petition for naturalization hearing and ask the court to declare citizenship. When I asked one attorney specifically why she would rather file mandamus instead of filing a petition for naturalization hearing, she said that courts also would not be able to declare citizenship without the necessary background check being completed. So they say better option is to file mandamus and have USCIS to complete their background check and make them adjudicate the case. What do you think of this? Do you still think a naturalization hearing is better then mandamus?

 

[Publicus]

Publicus, Great post! Thanks for sharing your knowledge. However, just a quick question for you or anyone who knows the answer: Although, I have no worries about my background, I am still curious if the background check for naturalization (fingerprint, name check, etc) is restricted only in the USA or also this proceeding is done in your country of origin? (I had my name cleared when I got my green card and since then I've been living in the US.)

That background check is restricted to the FBI terminals, which governs inside the US activities.

 

[Publicus]

You say that you are confident that my file is clean otherwise my case would have been denied by now. How do you come to this conclusion? Can you explain this in depth please? Does USCIS always deny firstly the deniable files early and then leave the clean files to later?

Well, if USCIS has a valid reason to deny the case, they do. It may take some time but they do. I read many cases where applicants had something fishy in their past and were denied citizenship based on that. Examples can be like committing a crime where the probation sentence was over 365 days before the change of law in 1996. Although the crime happened before 1996, USCIS still denied the case.

I've seen them deny cases based on lack of good moral character. If someone has many arrests on their file or has lied to them, they use this excuse to deny their file. Usually when USCIS' evidence is weak, it takes them a long time to decide a case.

Why do you think that this arrest is holding my case? This arrest took place several years ago and the charges were dropped.

Maybe. It was the only information you provided regarding your past. The reason why I said that is because I don't know the specifics of your case. I don't know how you entered the United States. I don't know how you gained your green card, and what happened afterwards. When you file for citizenship, all your immigration file gets reopened again. Everything that you have done from entering the US till the day you take the Oath get scrutinized by USCIS. It is very important that the applicants stay out of trouble, pays their taxes, and do their best to abide by the law literally. A small dispute can get your file denied if charges are filed.

I have spoken to a few attorneys. The attorneys all want to file mandamus rather than filing petition for naturalization hearing. They are not familiar or do not want to file petition for naturalization hearing and ask the court to declare citizenship. When I asked one attorney specifically why she would rather file mandamus instead of filing a petition for naturalization hearing, she said that courts also would not be able to declare citizenship without the necessary background check being completed. So they say better option is to file mandamus and have USCIS to complete their background check and make them adjudicate the case. What do you think of this? Do you still think a naturalization hearing is better then mandamus?

A Naturalization hearing is the best. The US code gives the court two choices: They can remand the case to USCIS with instruction to decide the case. (i.e. The case must be completed within 30 days) Or, which is a better outcome, they can decide the case. You are right, lawyers are not familiar with Naturalization hearings, and this is one of the reasons I filed my own case. Why pay a lawyer $1,000 or more, where all they will do is write the brief and mail it tto the courthouse. You can do this yourself and learn a great deal about US laws. Remember most immigration lawyers have experience with H-1 visas and other green card benefits and mandamus is used a lot by i-485 applicants. It is only after the events of 9/11 that delays became ridiculous and naturalization applicants became seeking the courts' help to finish their cases.

If you decide that you still need an attorney, when you get a subscription to PACER, you can look for lawyers in your area who have filed these hearings successfully, or you may go to the District Court in your state and look through their server for lawyers who filed cases in that court.

P.S. In your question regarding the cases I emailed you, do you need the whole file (including motions) or just a copy of the docket which shows how the cases progressed, then closed?

 

[needsolution]

Well, if USCIS has a valid reason to deny the case, they do. It may take some time but they do. I read many cases where applicants had something fishy in their past and were denied citizenship based on that. Examples can be like committing a crime where the probation sentence was over 365 days before the change of law in 1996. Although the crime happened before 1996, USCIS still denied the case.

I've seen them deny cases based on lack of good moral character. If someone has many arrests on their file or has lied to them, they use this excuse to deny their file. Usually when USCIS' evidence is weak, it takes them a long time to decide a case. ?

Now does this mean that USCIS has some evidence but weak evidence (to deny) on all or most of the cases that have been pending for a long time.

But I am confident your file is clean, otherwise your case would have been denied by now.

Why did you make this statement in your previous post then, if they actually deny cases regardless of lengths of time it has been pending. Your statement led me to believe that usually the files that have been pending for a while are most likely clean because they would have been denied by now.

A Naturalization hearing is the best. The US code gives the court two choices: They can remand the case to USCIS with instruction to decide the case. (i.e. The case must be completed within 30 days) Or, which is a better outcome, they can decide the case. .

Well since the court can not decide the case without the background check being completed (which is what an attorney told me), they can just remand the case to USCIS with instruction to decide the case, which becomes just like the same thing as mandamus. Correct me if I am wrong. Because in mandamus, the court instructs USCIS to decide the case as well as long as you ask the court for this.

P.S. In your question regarding the cases I emailed you, do you need the whole file (including motions) or just a copy of the docket which shows how the cases progressed, then closed?

I would like to have the whole files including motions so I can educate myself on how to write motions etc. Also please send me as many more cases as possilbe. I greatly appreciate your help.

 

[PP4U]

That background check is restricted to the FBI terminals, which governs inside the US activities.

Thank you for your prompt reply. However, I would like to know about the "FBI's Legal Attaché". According to the FBI, there are 50 Legal Attaché offices around the world (see further details here: http://www.fbi.gov/contact/legat/legat.htm ) and it says FBI has close contact with international law enforcement associations. If they have this worldwide technology available, why would they be be restricted to the US activities only and not also by checking with the the foreign police?

Thanks again for your time.

Regards,

 

[Publicus]

Now does this mean that USCIS has some evidence but weak evidence (to deny) on all or most of the cases that have been pending for a long time.
Why did you make this statement in your previous post then, if they actually deny cases regardless of lengths of time it has been pending. Your statement led me to believe that usually the files that have been pending for a while are most likely clean because they would have been denied by now.

Good questions NEEDSOLUTION.

My remarks were not meant to be a generalization. Most of the time, USCIS’ delays are a direct cause of bureaucracy: Delays in transfer of files, delays in background checks, etc... In your case, I said what I said because your wrote your name check was already completed in December 2002. Also sometimes the delay is because they are doing an internal investigation if they suspect a fraud in the applicant's immigration history.

When dealing with USCIS, you should know that any misstep, will cause your case to be delayed. Even rescheduling an appointment will cause long delays.

Again, it seems to me that your background checks are complete. The IBIS can be done by USCIS themselves, so there is no reason for them to delay your case for over three years, of course based on the information you provided. Now if the background check was pending with the FBI, that's another case. But you have said it was done back in 2002. Now when you apply for a naturalization hearing with the court, you are following the law. The law says after 120 days, USCIS has to make a decision. It does not say, after 120 days USCIS has to make a decision only if Background check is complete. You don't have to worry about the background check, that's not your problem. You should not pay for USCIS or any other agency's failure to do its duty under the law. Besides, most background checks, if pending when a lawsuit is filed, get completed right after the suit.

Well since the court can not decide the case without the background check being completed (which is what an attorney told me), they can just remand the case to USCIS with instruction to decide the case, which becomes just like the same thing as mandamus. Correct me if I am wrong. Because in mandamus, the court instructs USCIS to decide the case as well as long as you ask the court for this.

You are right! In mandamus the court instructs USCIS to decide the case within a certain period of time if you asked for it in the relief. But when you file a lawsuit, the US attorney pressures USCIS to decide the case because naturalization hearings are solid. And in many lawsuits, you find that they were dismissed after the background check was complete and USCIS could adjudicate the case. But let me give you a good piece of advice: When speaking to lawyers, make sure they are representing your interest and not USCIS’. The lawyer you were talking to, seems to be representing USCIS’ interest. He was indirectly telling you to wait more. What kind of lawyer is that?!?!?! Thanks to him, USCIS can now take three, four, even five years to adjudicate a case. This is not right. I am tired of being a Second Class Citizen, and I am working hard to become a full citizen. In the past, one of my acquaintances told me to wait, I told them to give up their citizenship, reapply to USCIS, and then wait!!! They were just looking at me. Most people tell you to wait because they don’t understand how hard it is to wait for long times. I understand and I know the emotional distress that comes with having to wait indefinitely. And that costs us a lot of money and privilege in wasted opportunities such as working with the government, being military officers, VOTING (and I so badly wanted to vote in 2004), being elected...etc

I am sorry but I cannot wait any longer. I couldn't wait. I had to bring attention to my case. The attention of the courts. When a way doesn't work, we must try other ways. And you too my friend, you should try other ways.

In the end, I will send you the files sometime tomorrow. Sorry but I am kind of tired now and need to go get some sleep. Good night.

 

[Publicus]

Thank you for your prompt reply. However, I would like to know about the "FBI's Legal Attaché". According to the FBI, there are 50 Legal Attaché offices around the world (see further details here: http://www.fbi.gov/contact/legat/legat.htm ) and it says FBI has close contact with international law enforcement associations. If they have this worldwide technology available, why would they be be restricted to the US activities only and not also by checking with the the foreign police?

Thanks again for your time.

Regards,

You're welcome! They only do checks through US consulates if you file a G325 form. Did you have to do that? Otherwise, if FBI has info regarding the applicant it should be in their terminals. I am not familiar however with how the FBI collects information on their terminals. But they do not do checks overseas for citizenship applicants. Those checks are done during the Adjustment of Status process.

 

[needsolution]

Thank you kindly, I appreciate your response

 

[Publicus]

I asked a lawyer on a different forum about consenting to use a magistrate judge in my case, and he adviced me to do so. His statement was as follow: "Magistrates are well trained and you will receive a fair hearing before one. Judges really hate it when you refuse to stipulate to a magistrate and make the judge handle all of the minor routine matters in a case."

So tomorrow I am planning on sending the District Court a copy of the form to consent to the use of a magistrate judge. I know the Assistant US attorney had refused to use a magistrate before and I don't know why?
I am planning on sending a copy to the US attorney as well.

Does anyone know if I should call the US attorney regarding my case or should I wait until they make the contact? Thanks.

 

[Publicus]

Jesus! I received my Pacer bill today and it was $70. That's a lot, and the scary thing is that it doesn't include the busy month of October.

 

[Manyung]

Manyung

I want to thank Publicus for sharing your hard work, information & feelings with those of us in a similar situation. I found this forum today & decided to join up, and respond. I too very much want to become a Citizen, but like so many others, my application seems to have been side tracked for one reason or another. I lead a very busy life: demanding job, wonderful wife, 3 year old twins, great friends. I can go for months without dwelling on the fact that the authorities in my chosen home country have yet to see fit to make me a citizen. 15 years as a green card holder. 15 years of solid employment in the same company. No arrests, taxes filed on time etc. I have NO secrets from the USCIS, but still I wait. And when I think about it, when I really dwell on the complete lack of any kind of word on my case, I feel 100% depressed, frustrated, & unsure of how to procede with my life. Sometimes I feel like packing up & taking the wife & kids back to my native land. ..... But then I think.. hell I LOVE this country. This is home to me.

Here is a summary of my time line, with the good, the bad & the ugly.

July 1990
Sydney, Australia: Applied for green card as spouse of a US Citizen.

August 1990
Sydney, Australia. Application was approved.

August 16, 1990. Los Angeles
Entered the US. Was issued paperwork in lieu of conditional green card.
July 6, 1992, Philadelphia
Conditional terms of green card removed.
July 2001, Philadelphia
Submitted N400 INS form – application for US Citizenship
July 6, 2002, Philadelphia
Completed & passed the Citizenship Civics & English Exam
July 2003, Philadelphia
Hired attorney to follow up. [No word at this point]
March 2004, Philadelphia
Attended 2nd interview at the Naturalization office, Philadelphia
Nothing respoved. Nothing divulged. Complete waste of time & money.

Background & possible relevant details:
1.
When I made the initial application for residency in 1990, I disclosed a conviction from 6/30/1980, in Australia. This was a $100.00 [USD$77.00] fine [default 1 month] for the possession of a marijuana pipe. I was required to apply for a section 212 waiver. The waiver was granted by INS, and my green card was approved. All this is documented in my INS file. The above mentioned conviction was expunged 10 years subsequent to the offence.
2.
When I was interviewed in June of 2002, the officer told me that there was a complication. [Nothing to do with the above mentioned conviction] When my original green card application was approved, I was assigned A number: AXXXXXXXXX. However, when I received my green card paperwork, and the actual green card, a different A number was assigned. That is the number that appears on my green card today: AXXXXXXXXXXY. Of course I never noticed this at the time. My A number was not something I looked at very often if ever.

The Officer went on to tell me that he would have to submit my application to a superior for final approval. He did say however that he would recommend that my application be approved & that in his opinion, I would be scheduled for the oath ceremony within weeks. He even went on to ask me my choice of venue for my swearing in. I waited from June 2002 until March of 2004 with no update on the status of my application.

3.
When I attended the second INS interview in March 2004, the officer on that occasion was apologetic & appeared somewhat confused as to why I was even scheduled for an interview that day. He advised me that my application could not proceed until my second file was located, and the two A numbers cross referenced.

My opinion:
I have a complete copy of my INS records and I doubt a second file exists, despite the existence of the second A number. Every document relating to my Green Card & Citizenship applications that I recall completing is contained in the file that the Naturalization office already has. Of course this is just my opinion. Also there's the issue with the drug related fine. I have the waiver which I must present every time I re-enter the US [At "secondary"] but I'm assuming that has been a contributing factor in the delay on my application.

I have since contacted the local Congressman who has in turn contacted his "contact" at USCIS. He has been "assured" that I should hear word on my oath ceremony any day now. That was in March this year. No word yet.

Like Publicus.. I too very much wanted to vote, and be a 1st class Citizen rather whatever it is we are as "Resident Aliens" Unlike Publicus, I do not have the time available in my day to file my own Petitions, read all the forums etc. I had no luck with the lawyer I hired. Indeed she did seem very hesitant to even consider filing a petition with the US District Court.

Any comments would be much appreciated.

 

[needsolution]

sue them asap!