mail2me_Ds
08-12 12:57 PM
Is USCIS following any pattern while approving I485 cases when the dates are current?.
wallpaper The War of the Worlds.
GCapplicant
08-07 09:56 AM
I am in EB3 and I have no intention to port my PD to EB2.I strongly believe we are in the last fag of the problem.
Why do you want to spoil others chances?- Are you scared or what?
This shows another example why we are not united.
If DOL had only cleared those poor old needed filers without opening a backlog ,EB3 woudn't have become a laughing stock by you fellows.There was not much big difference between EB2 and EB3 earlier years before.
That was the reason most of us agreed when we filed under EB3.
If they hadnt wasted the visas -EB3 and EB2 should have diff of 2 years only.
Thats the reason why EB3 is mad now.
Whatever - People supporting this cause are mere selfish.
If the EB3 guy wants to port to EB2 whats yr problem -
Already EB2 is flooded with applications -Most of them know what is happening and people want only EB2 status.Thankfully there are real IV members who are against this.
There are more exerienced and qualified EB3 people than me too.Dont spoil others future.
Lol! down this act and get rid of the attitude.There is no success in such selfish decisions.
Like how you need GC everyone needs GC to stay in this country.
you have no right to bring distress to another person's life.
Infact your are motivating EB3 to move to EB2 .
Thankyou.
Work with IV !
Why do you want to spoil others chances?- Are you scared or what?
This shows another example why we are not united.
If DOL had only cleared those poor old needed filers without opening a backlog ,EB3 woudn't have become a laughing stock by you fellows.There was not much big difference between EB2 and EB3 earlier years before.
That was the reason most of us agreed when we filed under EB3.
If they hadnt wasted the visas -EB3 and EB2 should have diff of 2 years only.
Thats the reason why EB3 is mad now.
Whatever - People supporting this cause are mere selfish.
If the EB3 guy wants to port to EB2 whats yr problem -
Already EB2 is flooded with applications -Most of them know what is happening and people want only EB2 status.Thankfully there are real IV members who are against this.
There are more exerienced and qualified EB3 people than me too.Dont spoil others future.
Lol! down this act and get rid of the attitude.There is no success in such selfish decisions.
Like how you need GC everyone needs GC to stay in this country.
you have no right to bring distress to another person's life.
Infact your are motivating EB3 to move to EB2 .
Thankyou.
Work with IV !
skynet2500
10-15 10:20 AM
I was able to contact NSC using POJ today. Got same response- File is with IO for review.
I could reach IO yesterday. representative said that me and my wife's cases are preadjudicated. Not sure if I could believe this...
I could reach IO yesterday. representative said that me and my wife's cases are preadjudicated. Not sure if I could believe this...
2011 War of the worlds
vignesh
09-13 09:50 AM
PD: 22nd March 2006
Opened a SR on 7th Sept and wrote a request to local Congress man.
Approval: 10th Sept
Got a email approval for spouse on 10th Sept ! No changes seen in my status online but I got a response for my SR request that my case is also approved on 10th Sept, the email from SR came on 10th Sept.
Till date no changes to my status online but when you call the USCIS toll free number, I do here my case is approved on 10th Sept.
Just sharing my experience and thanks to Immigration voice forum.
Opened a SR on 7th Sept and wrote a request to local Congress man.
Approval: 10th Sept
Got a email approval for spouse on 10th Sept ! No changes seen in my status online but I got a response for my SR request that my case is also approved on 10th Sept, the email from SR came on 10th Sept.
Till date no changes to my status online but when you call the USCIS toll free number, I do here my case is approved on 10th Sept.
Just sharing my experience and thanks to Immigration voice forum.
more...
veni001
04-05 07:01 AM
Those cases are void at least per DOS. If you look at last month (or prev 6 months) demand data from DOS .
Demand Prior to Jan1st 2006 for EB2 I/C = 0
Demand data reflects the latest and accurate. (at least this is the document DOS relies on to set the priority date in VB)
Nothing is void, unless the application(i485) is denied. If we compare Oct 2010 inventory with Jan 2011 inventory we see changes in monthly pending cases before 01/01/2006.
DOS look for approvable cases in a particular month, as opposed to USCIS look at overall pending cases.:)
The bottom line is how one is interpreting the data/information available? We really don't know how DOS is interpreting USCIS pending inventory when publishing their demand data.
Demand Prior to Jan1st 2006 for EB2 I/C = 0
Demand data reflects the latest and accurate. (at least this is the document DOS relies on to set the priority date in VB)
Nothing is void, unless the application(i485) is denied. If we compare Oct 2010 inventory with Jan 2011 inventory we see changes in monthly pending cases before 01/01/2006.
DOS look for approvable cases in a particular month, as opposed to USCIS look at overall pending cases.:)
The bottom line is how one is interpreting the data/information available? We really don't know how DOS is interpreting USCIS pending inventory when publishing their demand data.
gc_on_demand
09-09 02:37 PM
Good response from almost all . I didnot call Steve King and Lamar Smith. as well as those who are co -sponsers.
Also skipped Luis Gutirezze .. He was supportive in sub committe hearing last time .
Aide from Rep Chris Cannon took my name and no and she told me some one will get back to me as she is not sure about bill.
Guys keep calling.. People just take message and average call takes 1 min or less.
Also skipped Luis Gutirezze .. He was supportive in sub committe hearing last time .
Aide from Rep Chris Cannon took my name and no and she told me some one will get back to me as she is not sure about bill.
Guys keep calling.. People just take message and average call takes 1 min or less.
more...
anotherone
01-29 05:33 PM
ok this is what I have
a) email with offer of employment and link to I9 form in offer letter
b) accepted verbally
c) background check done and report sent to me
d) called and was chatting when I mentioned EAD, was told sorry we cant offer you employment due to EAD, and that is has to EAD filed by this company only because they cant verify its legality et., one way was for them to do my h1b but they are not hiring h1b right now, so sorry. later they said they would consult with legal and get back to me. however i dont hold out much hope
e) i immediately filled out the i9 form
f) wrote email to them outlining our conversation from d) explaining my surprise (and boy! was a surprised!) and trying to make my case that I was not a risky bet for the company because of how interminably long I have been in this country and my spouse had GC already, but mine was not processed in time before priority date became not current.
g) hr wrote back, acknowledging our conversation and saying that they were not sure and that is why they were going to consult with their legal dept and will talk next week.
All I have are emails and offer letter.
I really dont want to go the legal complaining route if this can be resolved. But I am in a fighting mode. I probably would not have been so upset if I had not turned down other interviews...
a) email with offer of employment and link to I9 form in offer letter
b) accepted verbally
c) background check done and report sent to me
d) called and was chatting when I mentioned EAD, was told sorry we cant offer you employment due to EAD, and that is has to EAD filed by this company only because they cant verify its legality et., one way was for them to do my h1b but they are not hiring h1b right now, so sorry. later they said they would consult with legal and get back to me. however i dont hold out much hope
e) i immediately filled out the i9 form
f) wrote email to them outlining our conversation from d) explaining my surprise (and boy! was a surprised!) and trying to make my case that I was not a risky bet for the company because of how interminably long I have been in this country and my spouse had GC already, but mine was not processed in time before priority date became not current.
g) hr wrote back, acknowledging our conversation and saying that they were not sure and that is why they were going to consult with their legal dept and will talk next week.
All I have are emails and offer letter.
I really dont want to go the legal complaining route if this can be resolved. But I am in a fighting mode. I probably would not have been so upset if I had not turned down other interviews...
2010 War of the Worlds
sunny1000
07-09 08:59 PM
Hello all
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
Why don't you enlighten us with the real problem that USCIS is facing?
If you think India is Great, why are you here and why did you apply for a GC? Why don't you set an example and leave first?
Nobody is doing anything forcefully. Sending flowers is a Gandhian method as I understand. Dr.Martin Luther King followed the Mahatma's foot steps and succeeded. Don't preach us about US and India.
If you consider it a shame, don't participate and go back. period. Don't tell us to packup.
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
Why don't you enlighten us with the real problem that USCIS is facing?
If you think India is Great, why are you here and why did you apply for a GC? Why don't you set an example and leave first?
Nobody is doing anything forcefully. Sending flowers is a Gandhian method as I understand. Dr.Martin Luther King followed the Mahatma's foot steps and succeeded. Don't preach us about US and India.
If you consider it a shame, don't participate and go back. period. Don't tell us to packup.
more...
abhis0
09-19 10:42 AM
Nope I gave him all info with application mailed on 11 June. They shd be able to pull info with my LS, FS, DOb and center filed.. not by date filed. Lets hope for the best. Yes he could see my checks not cashed and no info about me in the system.. may be thats why he made an email inquiry to NSC.
Hope this helps.
Rph
Did you by any chance speculated to him that application might be in TSC based on LUD on I140?
Hope this helps.
Rph
Did you by any chance speculated to him that application might be in TSC based on LUD on I140?
hair The aliens plot in War Of The
desi3933
06-17 01:33 PM
......You are NOT supposed to have immigration intent when you apply F1. .....
Correct. You are right.
One must not have immigration intent at the time of applying for F1 visa or entering USA using F1 visa. However, intent can change over time. Please google for 30-60-90 day rule.
In fact, one can file for I-485 after 90 days of F1 visa status, if he/she is otherwise eligible.
.
Correct. You are right.
One must not have immigration intent at the time of applying for F1 visa or entering USA using F1 visa. However, intent can change over time. Please google for 30-60-90 day rule.
In fact, one can file for I-485 after 90 days of F1 visa status, if he/she is otherwise eligible.
.
more...
mrsr
06-21 11:25 PM
In form G325A and 765 there is a question which ask all other name used , what should we write as our name is same as we have written in first and last name ( my maiden name and name after marriage is same )
also if there is no middle name should we leave the space blank or write N/A
in 485 in the Address C/O what should we write
please reply
also if there is no middle name should we leave the space blank or write N/A
in 485 in the Address C/O what should we write
please reply
hot pictures war of the worlds
AreWeThereYet
09-09 08:17 AM
That is not an RFE. It's a welcome notice, which is expected.
Today I got one more email (See below) and my status changed from CPO to Decision. What does that mean? Did they send an RFE?
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Your Case Status: Decision
On September 8, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before receiving your card, please call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283.
Today I got one more email (See below) and my status changed from CPO to Decision. What does that mean? Did they send an RFE?
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Your Case Status: Decision
On September 8, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before receiving your card, please call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283.
more...
house The original story, the
unseenguy
06-16 12:37 AM
Dude are you kidding me ... I am reporting a violation/fraud and I should hold my head down?? what kind of moral/ethical values you have.. I am keeping my head up (may be an inch or 2 higher than last 3 weeks) as my project manager and director (middle management ) fully supports me in this crusade. Most of the cases, upper management decides to replace all the local contractors with these outsourcing firms and once the contract is signed these companies dump all their L1 resources to projects and middle management who deals directly with the resources has minimal say in the process.
Let me ask you a simple question.. WHY ARE YOU SUPPORTING THIS FRAUDULANT ACTIVITY??? .... think for a minute and then decide whether to reply me back or not.. bye.
'Mileage for this complaint'.. in an economy when millions with eligibility are job less .. case regarding this fraud will have ZERO mileage! want to bet me on this .. come on dude.. come on. If you are on L1 visa talk to uer management and get it changed to something legally eligible to work on your project, instead trying to measure the mileage of L1 fraud, ICE/USCIS will measure that and we'll see whos head is going down here...
I am neither supporting you, nor am I supporting TCS/WIPRO. But I am seeing things from your client's perspective. Your client and director who ever they are , they might be saying one thing on the face and getting ready to save their company in the background. You know corporate world is a nasty place. Every recruiter who talks to you makes you feel as if he is the hiring manager and you have got the job, but does it happen that way? No. Similarly, your client is buying time and soothing you, I am not sure they are sincere about their comments. Everyone has some motive or personal interest in supporting things.
And to be honest, I doubt if you can come clean , hold your head high and say in public, I did it. If you do so , I will respect you as a whistleblower. Other wise, you are just mad that your are losing the job to others. If they cant get l1 on site, they will send the job offshore. There is not much you can do. Your client is towing your line until a smooth transition and then they are done with you , anyways. Its better you read writing on the wall and move on. You can invest the same time in finding other work and still have good relations with the current client. You never know when economy gets good, they may want you back at a higher price. But if they get to know you are doing this, most likely you will end up on some blacklist and I am not trying to scare you but world is a small place and you will run into same people many times.
My moral ethical values here are, someone doesnt want to work with me for some reason, whether they are doing their business with others ethically or unethically or illegally is upto them. I am moving on without a bad taste in mouth or complaint. It is company's choice whether they want to pay me or someone else. If they want to send my job offshore, they dont want to work with me for whatever reason, so I got to move on without complaint, thats my ethical value. whether others are doing it ethically or unethically is not my problem. You can choose to fight this, but your victory will only be temporary, say 6 months.
Let me ask you a simple question.. WHY ARE YOU SUPPORTING THIS FRAUDULANT ACTIVITY??? .... think for a minute and then decide whether to reply me back or not.. bye.
'Mileage for this complaint'.. in an economy when millions with eligibility are job less .. case regarding this fraud will have ZERO mileage! want to bet me on this .. come on dude.. come on. If you are on L1 visa talk to uer management and get it changed to something legally eligible to work on your project, instead trying to measure the mileage of L1 fraud, ICE/USCIS will measure that and we'll see whos head is going down here...
I am neither supporting you, nor am I supporting TCS/WIPRO. But I am seeing things from your client's perspective. Your client and director who ever they are , they might be saying one thing on the face and getting ready to save their company in the background. You know corporate world is a nasty place. Every recruiter who talks to you makes you feel as if he is the hiring manager and you have got the job, but does it happen that way? No. Similarly, your client is buying time and soothing you, I am not sure they are sincere about their comments. Everyone has some motive or personal interest in supporting things.
And to be honest, I doubt if you can come clean , hold your head high and say in public, I did it. If you do so , I will respect you as a whistleblower. Other wise, you are just mad that your are losing the job to others. If they cant get l1 on site, they will send the job offshore. There is not much you can do. Your client is towing your line until a smooth transition and then they are done with you , anyways. Its better you read writing on the wall and move on. You can invest the same time in finding other work and still have good relations with the current client. You never know when economy gets good, they may want you back at a higher price. But if they get to know you are doing this, most likely you will end up on some blacklist and I am not trying to scare you but world is a small place and you will run into same people many times.
My moral ethical values here are, someone doesnt want to work with me for some reason, whether they are doing their business with others ethically or unethically or illegally is upto them. I am moving on without a bad taste in mouth or complaint. It is company's choice whether they want to pay me or someone else. If they want to send my job offshore, they dont want to work with me for whatever reason, so I got to move on without complaint, thats my ethical value. whether others are doing it ethically or unethically is not my problem. You can choose to fight this, but your victory will only be temporary, say 6 months.
tattoo original war of the worlds
Robert Kumar
03-30 06:17 PM
Hopefully this is not a April fool joke!!!.
Hope all the dreams come true with flying colors, like India winning the cricket match againt pakistan today, what a great match it was..
Lets hope for the best for all. Cant wait for the next bulletin.
Do not forget to contribute to IV, even in small amounts as even a drop in the ocean matters, for providing us all this nice platform to share info.
Hope all the dreams come true with flying colors, like India winning the cricket match againt pakistan today, what a great match it was..
Lets hope for the best for all. Cant wait for the next bulletin.
Do not forget to contribute to IV, even in small amounts as even a drop in the ocean matters, for providing us all this nice platform to share info.
more...
pictures War of the World Aliens Die
ankur6ue
09-08 09:28 PM
PD is April 12 2006 not what I stated in the previous post. Sorry for the confusion
dresses War World on Xbox LIVE Arcade
desi3933
08-07 12:30 PM
Let me add my 2cents here.
This came up when I was discussing this topic with my lawyer friend -
Person can still file for GC when he/she is at school in eb3 and after finishing school, he/she can file another one for EB2 and can port the date to earlier PD, just like eb3 person who started work instead of going to school. Remember, GC is for the future job and person can not claim that he/she needs to be employed in order for GC to be filed.
Law does provide equal opportunity to both for PD recapture (aka PD porting).
Disclaimer: I am green card holder for 6 years and personally this issue does not affect me.
This came up when I was discussing this topic with my lawyer friend -
Person can still file for GC when he/she is at school in eb3 and after finishing school, he/she can file another one for EB2 and can port the date to earlier PD, just like eb3 person who started work instead of going to school. Remember, GC is for the future job and person can not claim that he/she needs to be employed in order for GC to be filed.
Law does provide equal opportunity to both for PD recapture (aka PD porting).
Disclaimer: I am green card holder for 6 years and personally this issue does not affect me.
more...
makeup War of the Worlds: Goliath
greencardvow
07-31 04:30 PM
You can withdraw an existing 485 application once you get Receipt No. Just write a letter to USCIS asking them to withdraw your 485 application stating the reason for withdrawl.
Sorry for the layman's question, but is there an established process for revoking an AOS application? Thanks for your input!
Sorry for the layman's question, but is there an established process for revoking an AOS application? Thanks for your input!
girlfriend War of the Worlds appears
mdy_tvr
05-07 04:45 PM
Guys,
My current situation is that my wife and I applied for 485 separately.
my wife's PD is 2007 ( 485 applied in Aug 2007 )
I applied for 485 in Oct 2007, Since my PD is 2003 and is current as of now ( my 140 is pending ), I talked with our companys lawyer on what options do I have with regards to my wife's 485.
My lawyer suggested 2 options.
1. File 485 again for my wife as a spouse derivative. As per lawyer, this is very common and has experienced with these kind of situations.
2. Instead of filing a second 485 for my wife, just write a request letter to move her pending 485 to my 485 as a derivative. If this porting is successful, she cannot move back to her own 485.
I know some of us have gone with option#(1), but since option(2) involves very less paper work, did any of you have used this option so far?
I am confused as to which one to choose. My lawyer spelled diplomatic when asked about which option is better/safer:-)
Thanks
mdy_tvr
My current situation is that my wife and I applied for 485 separately.
my wife's PD is 2007 ( 485 applied in Aug 2007 )
I applied for 485 in Oct 2007, Since my PD is 2003 and is current as of now ( my 140 is pending ), I talked with our companys lawyer on what options do I have with regards to my wife's 485.
My lawyer suggested 2 options.
1. File 485 again for my wife as a spouse derivative. As per lawyer, this is very common and has experienced with these kind of situations.
2. Instead of filing a second 485 for my wife, just write a request letter to move her pending 485 to my 485 as a derivative. If this porting is successful, she cannot move back to her own 485.
I know some of us have gone with option#(1), but since option(2) involves very less paper work, did any of you have used this option so far?
I am confused as to which one to choose. My lawyer spelled diplomatic when asked about which option is better/safer:-)
Thanks
mdy_tvr
hairstyles Alien INVADERS made me a
silverstone
01-12 11:01 PM
What about this bill and look at the following section. Does it mean EB visas will go up to 260,000. Then its good news.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.3938:
'Title VI SEC. 601. INCREASE IN EMPLOYMENT BASED VISAS.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the number of employment-based visas made available under sections 201(d) and 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151(d), 1153(b)) for each fiscal year (beginning with the first fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act) is hereby increased by 120,000'.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.3938:
'Title VI SEC. 601. INCREASE IN EMPLOYMENT BASED VISAS.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the number of employment-based visas made available under sections 201(d) and 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151(d), 1153(b)) for each fiscal year (beginning with the first fiscal year beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act) is hereby increased by 120,000'.
DallasBlue
08-12 02:44 PM
http://www.ailf.org/lac/clearinghouse_mandamus.shtml
Plaintiffs' Arguments
Plaintiffs have responded to USCIS with legal arguments summarized below. The case citations provide recent examples of cases where the courts have agreed with plaintiffs' arguments. For further discussion of the elements of a successful mandamus complaint, see AILF's Practice Advisory, "Mandamus Actions: Avoiding Dismissal and Proving the Case."
1) Plaintiffs have a clear right to have their adjustment applications and visa petitions adjudicated in a timely manner.
Plaintiffs maintain that the right to adjudication is derived from USCIS's mandatory duty to process the applications and the fact that plaintiffs are the intended beneficiaries of the applications. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (providing that the "applicant shall be notified of the decision of the director and, if the application is denied, the reasons for the denial"); Haidari v. Frazier, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177, *10 (D. Minn. 2006) (holding that 8 C.F.R. � 209.2 creates a nondiscretionary duty to adjudicate adjustment applications).
The plaintiffs' right to a timely adjudication, though not explicit in the regulation, is present in section 555(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires that "with due regard for the convenience and necessity of the parties or their representatives and within a reasonable time, each agency shall proceed to conclude a matter presented to it." See Haidari, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *11. To determine if a delay is unreasonable, courts examine the reasons for delay. For example, they look to whether USCIS asked for the FBI name check in a timely manner and whether USCIS failed to timely process the applications before requesting the name check and after receiving the information from the FBI. See Haidari, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *16-17; Singh v. Still, No. 06-2458, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334, *13-14 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (reasoning that respondents failed to explain why it took two-and-a-half years to initiate a security check with the FBI, why no action was taken to follow up with the FBI until the mandamus suit was filed, and why it took so long to process plaintiff's initial fingerprints); Aboushaban v. Mueller, No. 06-1280, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81076, *14 (N.D. Cal. 2006) ("[t]he FBI's delay in processing plaintiff's name check remains largely unexplained, and the remainder of defendants' arguments do not adequately excuse the delays plaintiff encountered.").
2) USCIS has a nondiscretionary duty to process applications and petitions.
USCIS has the discretion to grant or deny the application, but this does not bear on the nondiscretionary duty to make a decision on the application or petition. See Razaq v. Poulos, No. 06-2461, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 770, *9-10 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (reasoning that the fact that there is no specific deadline in the statute or regulation does not change the ministerial duty to process the application). In addition, INA � 242(a)(2)(B)(ii), 8 U.S.C. �1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), does not strip the court of jurisdiction to hear mandamus actions because no "decision or action" has taken place within the meaning of the statutory language. See Haidari, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *13-14 (D. Minn. 2006) (reasoning that because plaintiffs have neither been denied nor granted relief, � 242(a)(2)(B) does not bar jurisdiction); Li Duan v. Zamberry, No. 06-1351, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12697, *6-7 (W.D. Pa. 2007) (finding that INA � 242(a)(2)(B) does not apply because the pace of the adjudication of applications is not the type of discretionary "action" contemplated by the statute). For more information and earlier case law addressing discretionary decisions after the REAL ID Act please see AILF Practice Advisory, "Federal Court Jurisdiction Over Discretionary Decisions After REAL ID: Mandamus, Other Affirmative Suits and Petitions for Review."
3) There is no other remedy available to plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs also have argued that waiting for security checks to be completed is not an adequate remedy. The fact that plaintiffs are waiting is the exact harm plaintiffs are seeking to remedy. See Singh, No. 06-2458, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334 at *23-24 (N.D. Cal. 2007) ("waiting for an agency to act cannot logically be an adequate alternative to an order compelling the agency to act. . .") (citations omitted); Haidari, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *15 (D. Minn. 2006) (reasoning that waiting is not an adequate remedy because the question is whether plaintiffs have an adequate alternative remedy to the waiting itself).
Plaintiffs' Arguments
Plaintiffs have responded to USCIS with legal arguments summarized below. The case citations provide recent examples of cases where the courts have agreed with plaintiffs' arguments. For further discussion of the elements of a successful mandamus complaint, see AILF's Practice Advisory, "Mandamus Actions: Avoiding Dismissal and Proving the Case."
1) Plaintiffs have a clear right to have their adjustment applications and visa petitions adjudicated in a timely manner.
Plaintiffs maintain that the right to adjudication is derived from USCIS's mandatory duty to process the applications and the fact that plaintiffs are the intended beneficiaries of the applications. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (providing that the "applicant shall be notified of the decision of the director and, if the application is denied, the reasons for the denial"); Haidari v. Frazier, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177, *10 (D. Minn. 2006) (holding that 8 C.F.R. � 209.2 creates a nondiscretionary duty to adjudicate adjustment applications).
The plaintiffs' right to a timely adjudication, though not explicit in the regulation, is present in section 555(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires that "with due regard for the convenience and necessity of the parties or their representatives and within a reasonable time, each agency shall proceed to conclude a matter presented to it." See Haidari, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *11. To determine if a delay is unreasonable, courts examine the reasons for delay. For example, they look to whether USCIS asked for the FBI name check in a timely manner and whether USCIS failed to timely process the applications before requesting the name check and after receiving the information from the FBI. See Haidari, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *16-17; Singh v. Still, No. 06-2458, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334, *13-14 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (reasoning that respondents failed to explain why it took two-and-a-half years to initiate a security check with the FBI, why no action was taken to follow up with the FBI until the mandamus suit was filed, and why it took so long to process plaintiff's initial fingerprints); Aboushaban v. Mueller, No. 06-1280, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81076, *14 (N.D. Cal. 2006) ("[t]he FBI's delay in processing plaintiff's name check remains largely unexplained, and the remainder of defendants' arguments do not adequately excuse the delays plaintiff encountered.").
2) USCIS has a nondiscretionary duty to process applications and petitions.
USCIS has the discretion to grant or deny the application, but this does not bear on the nondiscretionary duty to make a decision on the application or petition. See Razaq v. Poulos, No. 06-2461, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 770, *9-10 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (reasoning that the fact that there is no specific deadline in the statute or regulation does not change the ministerial duty to process the application). In addition, INA � 242(a)(2)(B)(ii), 8 U.S.C. �1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), does not strip the court of jurisdiction to hear mandamus actions because no "decision or action" has taken place within the meaning of the statutory language. See Haidari, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *13-14 (D. Minn. 2006) (reasoning that because plaintiffs have neither been denied nor granted relief, � 242(a)(2)(B) does not bar jurisdiction); Li Duan v. Zamberry, No. 06-1351, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12697, *6-7 (W.D. Pa. 2007) (finding that INA � 242(a)(2)(B) does not apply because the pace of the adjudication of applications is not the type of discretionary "action" contemplated by the statute). For more information and earlier case law addressing discretionary decisions after the REAL ID Act please see AILF Practice Advisory, "Federal Court Jurisdiction Over Discretionary Decisions After REAL ID: Mandamus, Other Affirmative Suits and Petitions for Review."
3) There is no other remedy available to plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs also have argued that waiting for security checks to be completed is not an adequate remedy. The fact that plaintiffs are waiting is the exact harm plaintiffs are seeking to remedy. See Singh, No. 06-2458, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334 at *23-24 (N.D. Cal. 2007) ("waiting for an agency to act cannot logically be an adequate alternative to an order compelling the agency to act. . .") (citations omitted); Haidari, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *15 (D. Minn. 2006) (reasoning that waiting is not an adequate remedy because the question is whether plaintiffs have an adequate alternative remedy to the waiting itself).
shahuja
02-05 04:54 PM
hi singhv,
no. VO said.."its approved and you should receive it by courier within a couple of days" now the embassy inquiry centre do not tell me why its delayed..i asked me them is it PIMS or some thing else..they say "sorry maam, we cannot say"
i got no email, no slip, so i dont know if its stuck in PIMS or some checks ???
And if its really NOT PIMS and something else, then how long does one estimate ?? how long could an administrative processing take ? how long could security check take ? how long could name check take ? etc etc..
shahuja
no. VO said.."its approved and you should receive it by courier within a couple of days" now the embassy inquiry centre do not tell me why its delayed..i asked me them is it PIMS or some thing else..they say "sorry maam, we cannot say"
i got no email, no slip, so i dont know if its stuck in PIMS or some checks ???
And if its really NOT PIMS and something else, then how long does one estimate ?? how long could an administrative processing take ? how long could security check take ? how long could name check take ? etc etc..
shahuja
