Ready to File Law Suit against BCIS

D

dsatish

Registered Users (C)
Hi All,
Rajiv Khanna is willing to file a Law Suit against BCISfor their delays. He needs some strong cases which can justidy the law Suit. Please let us know who wants to be part of the Law Suit ?
I have copied his posting in another thread and posting it below :
---------------------------------------------
Its a Go!
Here is an email I have sent out this morning:

Folks, I think we are getting ready to file a law suit against INS for 485 delays. I think we have enough legal support to at least sustain a cause of action. Our team has researched preliminarily some of the law in our support. A member of the community pointed out AC21 also. I doubt if we can file a private law suit to enforce these provisions. But at least we can make an argument. See attached memo. This memo is very rough, so please ignore any semantics that you find faulty.

What I need now from the community now is a list of may be 5 to10 I-485 applicants whose applications have been pending for a long time; who have relatively "clean cases" (degrees from USA, verifiable experience, no criminal background, working with the same employer who is processing the green card and preferably some extraordinary hardship because of the delay).

These people must be committed and make themselves available as needed for speaking with us on the phone. They must sign contracts with our firm agreeing to our representation. They will be charged nothing. But if you folks wish to collect money, please do so on volunteer basis. Vijay Sharma, vijay.sharma@immigration.com can open an account to hold the funds. You can contact him directly. We would certainly welcome contributions from the community. It will help us expend more resources towards the litigation.

Suman ji, our team just needs to meet with me today. I will explain the logistics. Monica, post this announcement in the Moderators' forum also.


Let me know.
(Rajiv Khanna)
-------------------------------------------------------

For more details, please click at the following link
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=640452#post640452
 
my case is clean

I feel my case is clean . Filed on 11/19/2001. All ready
passed the JIT date for long time now. Never
changed employer. No criminal background. Did FP
twice. Also replied to RFE. Not sure what else UCIS
wants to adjudicate this case. I just filed to extend
AP/EAD for third time. Had to extend h1 twice.

Where can I send the details. Unfornuately I cannot
come up with any money. So please excuse. All my
money will be going to banks as they are giving
me high interest rates since I dont have GC. This is
hardship.
 
bhavoo,
Thanks for volunteering. We will contact you in a few days.

others,
Are there no genuine candidates with wait periods of more than 2 years ? That's disappointing. If any such candidate is there, please come forward.
 
dsathish,

What is the basis of determining 2 year wait as "genuine"? If we go by the suggestion made by Congress (S2045) the wait time should be 180 days ( 6 months). If we go by our receipt notice it may be upto 999 days. I don't think we can go by the JIT report because BCIS has a disclaimer saying that it is only a ballpark date.My waiting time is less than 2 years. I personally don't think a lawsuit will work but if Mr.Khanna feels otherwise I ain't gonna argue with him. I am just trying to figure out the logic behind the decision of what constitutes a "reasonable" waiting time beyond which we can "demand" adjudigation in the form of a lawsuit. Please explain.
 
Originally posted by ECGC
dsathish,

What is the basis of determining 2 year wait as "genuine"? If we go by the suggestion made by Congress (S2045) the wait time should be 180 days ( 6 months). If we go by our receipt notice it may be upto 999 days. I don't think we can go by the JIT report because BCIS has a disclaimer saying that it is only a ballpark date.My waiting time is less than 2 years. I personally don't think a lawsuit will work but if Mr.Khanna feels otherwise I ain't gonna argue with him. I am just trying to figure out the logic behind the decision of what constitutes a "reasonable" waiting time beyond which we can "demand" adjudigation in the form of a lawsuit. Please explain.
Click to expand...

ECGC, need to think positive here. You do speak sense, but the final bottom line is, it pushes a pin in our hot air baloon. It just might be only hot air, but it's better than doing nothing.

About how can you determine a 2 year wait as genuine, all you have to do is bring up a case exactly like yours, that got approved in lesser time as you. The lawyers can debate that till the cows come home, but as long as BCIS knows that they are not kings and we will try and do something - they just might decide to clean up their act - and thats all we need. What's more, you can definitely sue them for not having their operations transparent enough and not having a good enough communication. That is a good start in the long uphill battle of improving things.

I think we should go for it without worrying if it'll work or not. I would very strongly encourage all waiters to support this.
 
In my understanding, once the class action would start, everyone can join it.
However, when filing a lawsuite, Rajiv needs 5-10 plaintiffs.
I think it's advantageous at the lawsuite to select plaintiffs who have been pending for a long time; who have relatively "clean cases" and preferably some extraordinary hardship because of the delay.
(I might be wroing because I am not so familier with lawsuite.)

I may become one of plaintiffs, but my case has been pending for ONLY 22 months.
I think there are some people having been waiting longer than me with some extraordinary hardship.
I encourage you to nominate yourself.
-kashmir
 
Originally posted by Silly Man
ECGC, need to think positive here. You do speak sense, but the final bottom line is, it pushes a pin in our hot air baloon. It just might be only hot air, but it's better than doing nothing.

About how can you determine a 2 year wait as genuine, all you have to do is bring up a case exactly like yours, that got approved in lesser time as you. The lawyers can debate that till the cows come home, but as long as BCIS knows that they are not kings and we will try and do something - they just might decide to clean up their act - and thats all we need. What's more, you can definitely sue them for not having their operations transparent enough and not having a good enough communication. That is a good start in the long uphill battle of improving things.

I think we should go for it without worrying if it'll work or not. I would very strongly encourage all waiters to support this.
Click to expand...

SM,
I disagree with you. Having hope is a good thing but having false hopes can have adverse consequences. Also, jumping into something without analyzing whether it will work or not is also, in my opinion, not wise. It is great that Mr.Khanna has agreed to represent us but don't we need to know what he is planning to go after? Asking these questions doesn't mean I am not supporting this but I would feel like a sheep in a herd if I move forward in the pointed direction without knowing where I am going or why.
Your message seems to suggest that my case has been approved -it is not(i may have misunderstood your statement also). How can we say that their (BCIS) operations are not transparent when we have accepted a receipt notice that says "this type of application takes up to 999 days to process". My receiving that notice, don't we give implied consent to wait for the stipulated period?I agree that their communication with applicants is not pristine but is that enough for a lawsuit?
I also agree that doing something is better than doing nothing. But if that something is blowing "hot air" as you suggested, that's wasting time and resources, both ours and Mr.Khanna's. In my opinion, doing something is what edison and kashmir are doing. Mobilize support and resources to convince lawmakers and BCIS authorities to speed up the process- townhall meetings, petitions, e-mails, faxes and lobbying. That will work. Long and uphill battle,yes. But will work. cheers!!
 
ECGC... your concerns are valid. But, unfortunately, this is not a hindi movie where you go to court, show emotions and win the case. Since the law does not explicitly direct INS to process a case within a certain time duration, there is no legal basis to bring an action solely on the basis of delays. However, an action can be brought on the basis of unreasonable delays in processing. If you can show that INS is delaying your application for not apparent reason while it is processing applications received way after your application, you can go in front of a federal judge (writ of mandmous) and request her to direct INS to process your application. Or, if a large number of applicants ("a class") is being affected by the unreasonable delays, a class action lawsuit could be filed.

kashmir is right. For a class action, initially few very pressing cases are needed to act as lead plaintiffs. A "class" is then defined and everybody who falls in the class becomes a plaintiff automatically.

To start the case, the lawyer will have to show that these plaintiffs are waiting for over 2 years (which is beyond JIT and that apparently makes it unreasonable delay) which is unreasonable time and in itself can be pressumed to cause "hardship". Basically, you will have to show hardhsip. If you can show "hardship" even if your case is not pending for an unreasonably long time, you can come forward too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ECGC,

In my opinion the concept behind the lawsuit will fail if we ask for approvals just because we have been waiting 1 - 2 years. As mentioned by you, acceptance of the notice, that says approximate processing time - 999 days, is tacit acknowledgement of the wait times.

Here is the lawsuit that I believe will work:
1. EAD/AP is given for 1 year, due to the backlogs, the processing for renewal EAD/AP is over 8 months and growing.
2. The INS treats this process as a cash cow while withholding relief.
3. This means that the INS is fraudelent taking our money for services NOT rendered.
4. Solutions for above:
a. Reduce 485 wait times so people won't have to get into EAD cycle.
b. Extend durations of EAD/AP applications so that once you apply for them, you don't have to apply again, till the time you get your GC.
5. Doing 4. above, will cut down on the vicious cycle of taking adjucators away from 485 processing. Stream line the AOS process, and hopefully reduce the backlog.

Having said the above a couple more points on the lawsuit:
1. The whole point behind the lawsuit is mainly to draw attention to our cause and in doing so increase priority of AOS processing.
2. Modify the way INS works so that people coming behind us don't have to go through this shit time and time again.

Hope that satisfies in someway the reasoning behind the lawsuit. Rajiv Khanna is aware of the situation as you can see from the core team thread on VSC. And the call for people waiting more than 2 years is just to add a human interest concept to the law suit. The American justice system is definitely partial to the honest, upright, clean cut person in a bad situation due to no fault of his.
 
Valid point 140_takes_4ever

140_takes_4ever, you have a valid point.

The lawyers understand it best. Since Mr. Rajiv Khanna is ready to take the case it means he thinks that it's viable and will have positive outcome.

I would strongly request for genuine volunteers to come forward.

God Bless all!
 
good saint,

We are on the same page as to "this is not a hindi movie" part. But you should have addressed that to SM 'cause he talked more about emotions than logic.

I-140,

Finally someone is making sense-you!!
I agree with your Point#2- IF WE CAN PROVE that BCIS is intentionally prolonging the 485 process so that they can make money outa EADs and APs- we have a winner for a class action-in which case the 2 year time really doesn't mean anything-anyone who has had a couple of EAD renewals can be part of the class action suit. However, one caveat is that BCIS may come back and say that since the plaintiff(s) have agreed to wait for "upto" 999 days, the only way to stay in status is to renew your EAD during the intereim. Eventhough we can argue that such repeated renewals of EAD will redirect much needed resources away from I-485 adjudigations, my question is if that is a good enough reason for a lawsuit?If Mr.khanna's team feels if that is good enough, then may be it is.Also, stating that someone else's application got processed earlier than yours is a useless argument because of the same implied consent that you were willing to wait for upto 999 days. I think you(140) agreed with me on that one in your message.
Also, I think it will be extremely hard to prove hardships because of these waiting times. Eventhough i share the pain of many of you here about postponing good things in life such as marriage, buying a house, having kids, unable to travel in and out of the country at will etc., these are hardly extenuating circumstances from the legal standpoint.
In any case, I am all for us doing something collectively. But let's debate it well and do the most sensible thing. No hot airs. Cheers!!
 
I would like to be part of the lawsuit, but my case has been pending for 22 months.
As for hardships, I am scared shitless of the layoff and I have a heart condition probably caused by stress because of layoffs.
After filing for AP for my wife, I bought an airplane ticket to Croatia so that she and our son can see our families there, but in spite of 30-60 days that was written on the AP receipt notice, it took over 90 days to be approved and I had to change the flight. This is not really a hardship, but a major inconvenience.
 
Originally posted by ECGC
However, one caveat is that BCIS may come back and say that since the plaintiff(s) have agreed to wait for "upto" 999 days, the only way to stay in status is to renew your EAD during the intereim.
Click to expand...
Don't see how BCIS can make that stick! How does applying repeatedly for EAD have anything to do with staying in status? As an adjustee, you don't have to maintain any kind of documentation to maintain status, being an adjustee IS your status. EAD is just a work authorization, the reason it was inititally issued for 12 months was because, it was seen as an interim measure to grant relief to immigrants waiting for their GC's. The key thought behind that move was that AOS takes about 12 months to process. Now thanks to the inefficiency of the INS or the excessive number of immigrants, the system is over whelmed and the sop (EAD/AP) has now turned to be a major pain in the ass!

Originally posted by ECGC
my question is if that is a good enough reason for a lawsuit?If Mr.khanna's team feels if that is good enough, then may be it is.Also, stating that someone else's application got processed earlier than yours is a useless argument because of the same implied consent that you were willing to wait for upto 999 days. I think you(140) agreed with me on that one in your message.
Also, I think it will be extremely hard to prove hardships because of these waiting times.
Click to expand...

Actually Rajiv, thinks the EAD/AP argument is pretty good and worth a fight. He hired someone to check the viability of that premise and looks like he thinks the lawsuit has a chance in the court of law so has decided to go for broke.

The key thing to remember here is that Rajiv Khanna, has NOT asked for a single dollar for this service, he is putting his money where his mouth is and regardless of all the hot air floating around this thread, that is what NONE of us have done. So I have some hopes for this lawsuit.

As far as the argument about other people's cases getting approved before yours is concerned, it definitely bought a laugh on an otherwise dull day. An analogy would be a class V kid bitching to his mother/teacher about a sum that was marked right for his/her friend by wrong for him/her. That is a bloody specious argument and I don't think Rajiv Khanna would go near it with a 10 foot pole!
 
140,

Thanks for clarifying. What I should have said was that you need to renew your EAD to maintain your job which then helps maintaining your 485 while it is pending. I can see now that we can ask them to either bring down the adjudigating time to < 1 year or make the EAD valid until a decision is made on the 485 application. It would be a win-win situation because either we have our application processed quickly or by eliminating the EAD renewal requirement, free up the adjudigators who otherwise would be working on EAD renewals to work on 485. We could lobby for that resource alocation if that happens.

I am glad this debate brought out these issues and clarified it for many of us. Credit goes to 140_takes-4ever!!
 
I have seen the figure - 999 days - floating around in this thread. In my case, the receipt notice mentions 160-180 days. And it was filed in Feb, which makes it around 300 days till now. So if I become one of the plaintiffs, will the lawsuit have a better chance of succeeding? Because, as per some of the arguments on this thread, we accepted the BCIS timeframe when they sent the notices mentioning 999 days, and hence have no reasonable grounds for a lawsuit.

Can somebody clarify?

Thanks,

extra_dry_gin
 
Originally posted by ECGC
free up the adjudigators who otherwise would be working on EAD renewals to work on 485. We could lobby for that resource alocation if that happens.
Click to expand...
ECGC,

That is a big IF! Knowing INS they will probably take those adjudicators that are freed from EAD/AP renewals and put them down to adjudicating something akin to TPS/religious workers etc. :(

Whatever said above, my main interest in the lawsuit is driven by a need to raise awareness within the INS. Personally I don't care if we win or lose the case. I just want someone to shove it down INS/BCIS's throat that we (485 adjustee's), are legal immigrants, we cannot be taken for granted, and we will fight back if pushed to the wall, they way we have been treated over the past 2 years.

If nothing, I am hoping that the INS top brass come to the conclusion that it is better to get rid of these trouble makers, rather than keep them around to make more trouble for INS.

The only way to achieve the above is a multi-pronged strategy, Legislative, Legal and Lobbying. It is only together that the all this will make a difference in the lives of ordinary legal immigrants. I am hoping the silent majority on this forum, come to the same conclusion, and support us in our common cause. Only if each and everyone of us raises his/her voice, will INS hear and be forced to act.

I will be glad if I can help in any way towards that goal. If we succeed, at the end of it, long after we have received our GC's and realised the futility of the whole excercise, it will definitely warm my heart to remember that I was part of a movement that changed the way the most inefficient branch of the executive worked! Now that is a cause worth fighting for! :)
 
Originally posted by extra_dry_gin
I have seen the figure - 999 days - floating around in this thread. In my case, the receipt notice mentions 160-180 days. And it was filed in Feb, which makes it around 300 days till now. So if I become one of the plaintiffs, will the lawsuit have a better chance of succeeding? Because, as per some of the arguments on this thread, we accepted the BCIS timeframe when they sent the notices mentioning 999 days, and hence have no reasonable grounds for a lawsuit.
Click to expand...
Don't take those statements at face value. When INS gives out processing dates, they are not promissory notes. They are just approximate time frames thrown around to give some prespective on processing times based upon current processing dates. I wouldn't read too much into that at all.

The main reason to bandy about the 999 days number is just to say that 999 days is a pretty darn long time for relief. And if your case has exceeded that number, then you should be looked at sympathetically.

FYI I have been waiting over 400 days, it is not that number which scares me, but the fact that people who have been waiting close to 700 days have no approvals in sight.
 
current list of candidates for plaintiffs

  • bhavoo WAC-02-049
  • ruxrux WAC-02-103
  • kashmir WAC-02-124
Any more self nominations ?
What I need now from the community now is a list of may be 5 to10 I-485 applicants whose applications have been pending for a long time; who have relatively "clean cases" (degrees from USA, verifiable experience, no criminal background, working with the same employer who is processing the green card and preferably some extraordinary hardship because of the delay).
Click to expand...
 
keep pushing

this is an awesome initiative.

the aim might not be to win the lawsuit but cause some action on the part of INS in terms of settling the case for increased speed/dedicated 485 resources.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top