Stats 1 - USCIS/FBI 0

[Stats]

Today received the best possible news from one of the more immigrant unfriendly District Courts and a judge that has previously dismissed scores of the WOM cases:

 

(Cliff notes)

 

Based on the foregoing the Court ORDERS as follows:

 

"The Defendants Motion to Dismiss is Denied

 

Defendants are ORDERED to show in cause why this case should not be remanded to USCIS to complete name check and I-485 "

 

Maybe, just maybe member# 153's SO will see a GC soon.

 

The tidal wave is coming and I love it.

Edited March 6, 2008 by Stats (see edit history)

[IllinoisDave]

Good news!

[Randy W]

What happens next?

[Stats]

What happens next?

 

After sleeping on it, I am wondering the same. It is possible CIS will say we are attempting to process as soon as possible, etc etc.

 

Or they may just cave in and issue the card. I guess I won't know for 10 days or so. I think I am going to call the AUSA and see what he says.

 

This decision is one of many recent losses for CIS with Districts expressing their impatience with Agency inaction. So they need to be very careful on how they respond.

[LeeFisher3]

Great news. Now I wanna see them parade out before the judge and say "But we have a policy memo that says we won't be intimidated by the courts to expedite the name check when we have screwed up".

 

I'm hoping for a GC soon.

[pkfops]

What happens next?

 

After sleeping on it, I am wondering the same. It is possible CIS will say we are attempting to process as soon as possible, etc etc.

 

Or they may just cave in and issue the card. I guess I won't know for 10 days or so. I think I am going to call the AUSA and see what he says.

 

This decision is one of many recent losses for CIS with Districts expressing their impatience with Agency inaction. So they need to be very careful on how they respond.

 

"The card is in the mail. If you don't receive it in 90 days, please call our 800 number".

[Stats]

Great news. Now I wanna see them parade out before the judge and say "But we have a policy memo that says we won't be intimidated by the courts to expedite the name check when we have screwed up".

 

I'm hoping for a GC soon.

 

Surprisingly, USCIS has taken the smart path. I was talking to the AUSA a few days ago, and he said he had given up predicting what USCIS does.

 

So the update: USCIS throws in the towel

 

DEFENDANTS¡¯ NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION TO

ORDER OF REMAND

On March 3, 2008, this Court entered its Memorandum and Order(M&O) denying defendants¡¯ Motion to Dismiss, and providing for a period of ten days for defendants ¡°to show cause in writing why the case should not be remanded to the

USCIS

with instructions to complete the name check and the adjudication of the plaintiff¡¯s

I-485

application within a reasonable time.¡±

Defendants do not oppose an Order remanding to the

USCIS

as articulated at page 9 of the M&O, and

can

demonstrate no cause why such an Order should not be issued.

 

Now the question becomes; will the Judge remand with a specified time frame, or just a "reasonable" one. My guess is CIS is hoping for the latter so they can finish whenever they feel like it.

 

My money is on the former, however this is his first, that I know of, MTD denial. So who knows.

[Randy W]

Great news. Now I wanna see them parade out before the judge and say "But we have a policy memo that says we won't be intimidated by the courts to expedite the name check when we have screwed up".

 

I'm hoping for a GC soon.

 

Surprisingly, USCIS has taken the smart path. I was talking to the AUSA a few days ago, and he said he had given up predicting what USCIS does.

 

So the update: USCIS throws in the towel

 

DEFENDANTS¡¯ NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION TO

ORDER OF REMAND

On March 3, 2008, this Court entered its Memorandum and Order(M&O) denying defendants¡¯ Motion to Dismiss, and providing for a period of ten days for defendants ¡°to show cause in writing why the case should not be remanded to the

USCIS

with instructions to complete the name check and the adjudication of the plaintiff¡¯s

I-485

application within a reasonable time.¡±

Defendants do not oppose an Order remanding to the

USCIS

as articulated at page 9 of the M&O, and

can

demonstrate no cause why such an Order should not be issued.

 

Now the question becomes; will the Judge remand with a specified time frame, or just a "reasonable" one. My guess is CIS is hoping for the latter so they can finish whenever they feel like it.

 

My money is on the former, however this is his first, that I know of, MTD denial. So who knows.

 

 

Watch your mailbox - they are adjusting status for all of us now. We were called in for a sworn statement, and an RFE (Jiaying's fingerprints weren't acceptable, so we had to go downtown to order a police report).

 

We are expecting the 10 yr. "Welcome to America" letter any day now.

[Stats]

 

Watch your mailbox - they are adjusting status for all of us now. We were called in for a sworn statement, and an RFE (Jiaying's fingerprints weren't acceptable, so we had to go downtown to order a police report).

 

We are expecting the 10 yr. "Welcome to America" letter any day now.

 

Randy,

 

Thanks for your response and please understand that my reply is not directed at you personally.

 

I have been pissed off for about a 1/2 day since seeing your response. In the 2/4/08 memo, USCIS committed to an oldest first policy. Obviously that is not happening as I am seeing others who have been waiting for shorter times get these letters.

 

I am fed up with almost 4 years of CIS abuse waiting for a GC, notwithstanding the process of getting her here.

 

I anxiously await the Judge's remand; it if is open ended I will file a motion for contempt of court after 30 days and march down to CIS with the remand order in hand and demand to speak to supervisors.

 

I am pissed off and I'm not going to take it anymore. I sued the SOB's prior to the memo and won; and I won't hesitate to take to the next level.

 

Hell based on this, I will counter motion if there is no specified time frame.

Edited March 14, 2008 by Stats (see edit history)

[Randy W]

 

Watch your mailbox - they are adjusting status for all of us now. We were called in for a sworn statement, and an RFE (Jiaying's fingerprints weren't acceptable, so we had to go downtown to order a police report).

 

We are expecting the 10 yr. "Welcome to America" letter any day now.

 

Randy,

 

Thanks for your response and please understand that my reply is not directed at you personally.

 

i have been pissed off for about 1/2 dat since seeing your repsonse. In the 2/4/08 memo, USCIS comitted to an oldest first policy.

 

 

Sorry - I should have mentioned that our name check may have been completed before Dec. The IO said it had been sitting on her desk for 2 months while she was out of town.

 

I understand - I wouldn't mind waiting for yours to go first, but I think we all take what we can get. Hopefully, they'll get yours soon.

[Stats]

 

 

Sorry - I should have mentioned that our name check may have been completed before Dec. The IO said it had been sitting on her desk for 2 months while she was out of town.

 

I understand - I wouldn't mind waiting for yours to go first, but I think we all take what we can get. Hopefully, they'll get yours soon.

 

Randy, thanks for letting me know and I appreciate it.

 

The AUSA said not to be very concerned. He feels this one is going to move pretty quickly.

[Stats]

Well, another update and it looks like the end of this saga is near.

 

This week the Judge remanded the case to CIS with an order to complete adjuciation in a "reasonable" time. I know that is open-ended, but as follows, should be a non-issue.

 

Yesterday we went to an InfoPass appointment for a status inquiry and to request updated fingerprints. The IO checked her computers and said the name check cleared last month. Then she said that the Service Center would have to schedule new fingerprints.

 

I said that we had not been notified in any way that the name check was complete. She said she would email the Service Center about an appointment and let a supervisor know that our case was ready for review. I said that would be good, and as further information, here is a copy of the Judge's Order to Remand. That got her attention, to say the least.

 

She had us sit down for about 10 minutes while she went somewhere in the back. When she came back, she printed out an appointment letter for fingerprints. She also said my wife's case file was on an adjudicator's desk and would be reviewed as soon as the prints were complete.

 

It gets better. When I got home, I emailed the AUSA to let him know the name check was complete. My relationship building apparently paid off, as he forwarded my email to a a high level CIS contact, who quickly emailed me back. She assured me that CIS would complete our case as quickly as possible and she was aware that we had been in the office in the morning. She asked that I let her know when the prints are complete so she can track the progress of the case.

 

I emailed the AUSA back thanking him for looping in the CIS contact. He emailed back saying that she was the go-to person that DOJ used in order to get anything done at CIS.

 

So it looks like there is light at the end of this long dark tunnel.

[Randy W]

Others have had to sign the "sworn statement" (that you still live together, and she hasn't been arrested), including one who got theirs by mail. Watch for that.

 

Congrats and good work! We all appreciate it.