Jump to content
NLZZLN

Filing lawsuit against the embassy and Uscis

 Share

115 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Ron12345 said:

I'm speculating. The main point is claiming that the government has not completed their own duty and using that as justification to refuse would never hold up in any court of law. There is no provision that authorizes such an action. They would be ordered to immediately complete their own processing and to then provide a proper decision. If they still refused, they would be ignoring a court order. I could imagine the judge ordering them to issue at that point.

 

Here is a recent example of a judge ordering the govt to print visas, despite the claim that they were still undergoing security checks:

https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/ny-metro-brooklyn-judge-orders-visas-yemeni-nationals-20180601-story.html

Your characterization of the facts is incorrect. Their security checks had been approved before the travel ban came in. Not the same case.

 

(and , aha, speculating lol) 

yes there is a huge difference between ordering them to hurry up, and ordering issuance of a visa! So glad you realize that!

Edited by SusieQQQ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ron12345 said:

The govt was claiming in court that they could not issue the visas because many of the applicants remained in security checks. The judge ordered them to print the visas. 

From the article you linked:

"Consular officers told the people their applications were now refused because of the ban, according to Cogan’s Tuesday ruling."

 

Only after the judge made their order:

"Government lawyers said Thursday they’ll be asking Cogan to rethink his order. One of the reasons is officials haven’t finished their security checks for most of the applicants, they said. The order, without any changes, “would require the government to issue visas to aliens who have not been adequately vetted,” according to a filing.

 

Goldberg said her clients all cleared security checks."

 

That part of the case was not in the judge's decision. So no ruling was made on the security check component, and potentially security checks were not even still pending.

Point is the case was about the travel ban, not security checks.

Edited by geowrian

Timelines:

ROC:

Spoiler

7/27/20: Sent forms to Dallas lockbox, 7/30/20: Received by USCIS, 8/10 NOA1 electronic notification received, 8/1/ NOA1 hard copy received

AOS:

Spoiler

AOS (I-485 + I-131 + I-765):

9/25/17: sent forms to Chicago, 9/27/17: received by USCIS, 10/4/17: NOA1 electronic notification received, 10/10/17: NOA1 hard copy received. Social Security card being issued in married name (3rd attempt!)

10/14/17: Biometrics appointment notice received, 10/25/17: Biometrics

1/2/18: EAD + AP approved (no website update), 1/5/18: EAD + AP mailed, 1/8/18: EAD + AP approval notice hardcopies received, 1/10/18: EAD + AP received

9/5/18: Interview scheduled notice, 10/17/18: Interview

10/24/18: Green card produced notice, 10/25/18: Formal approval, 10/31/18: Green card received

K-1:

Spoiler

I-129F

12/1/16: sent, 12/14/16: NOA1 hard copy received, 3/10/17: RFE (IMB verification), 3/22/17: RFE response received

3/24/17: Approved! , 3/30/17: NOA2 hard copy received

 

NVC

4/6/2017: Received, 4/12/2017: Sent to Riyadh embassy, 4/16/2017: Case received at Riyadh embassy, 4/21/2017: Request case transfer to Manila, approved 4/24/2017

 

K-1

5/1/2017: Case received by Manila (1 week embassy transfer??? Lucky~)

7/13/2017: Interview: APPROVED!!!

7/19/2017: Visa in hand

8/15/2017: POE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ron12345 said:

The govt was claiming in court that they could not issue the visas because many of the applicants remained in security checks. The judge ordered them to print the visas. 

Read the entire article.  These were people who already passed the background check but were stopped because of the EO.

 

 After officials already gave the green light on applications to enter the United States, Judge Brian Cogan said the government needed to honor “its representations to prospective immigrants” — and do it quickly.

 

They were already approved and the visa were not printed do to the EO.  That is kind of a big difference in the cases.

 

 

PHILIPPINES ONLY!!!  CFO (Commission on Filipinos Overseas) INFO - Can't leave home without it!

 

PDOS (Pre-Departure Registration and Orientation Seminar) is for ages 20-59.  Peer Counseling is for 13-19 years of age.

It is required to have the visa in their passport for PDOS and Peer Counseling.

 

GCP (Guidance and Counseling Program) is for K-1 Fiancee and IR/CR-1 spouse ONLY. 

 

 

IMG_5168.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SusieQQQ said:

Your characterization of the facts are incorrect. Their security checks had been approved before the travel ban came in. Not the same case.

They were "approved", but not issued prior to the ban.

 

Ban came into effect. Visas were held. Ban lifted. Applicants sue.

 

State claims that applicants are pending security checks... 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ron12345 said:

They were "approved", but not issued prior to the ban.

 

Ban came into effect. Visas were held. Ban lifted. Applicants sue.

 

State claims that applicants are pending security checks... 

 

 

It’s not the same case, you already admitted that.

“Not relevant, your honor.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, geowrian said:

That part of the case was not in the judge's decision. So no ruling was made on the security check component, and potentially security checks were not even still pending.

Point is the case was about the travel ban, not security checks.

If they were given a 221g then it shouldn't matter when they were given a 221g. You are basically arguing that there is no time limit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ron12345 said:

They were "approved", but not issued prior to the ban.

 

Ban came into effect. Visas were held. Ban lifted. Applicants sue.

 

State claims that applicants are pending security checks... 

 

 

Yes, but you have not been approved.  That part of the process is not done.  Anyone in your situation from Yeman at the time would not be issued a visa without proper vetting and approvals.  The judge ordered them to fulfill their obligations to approved petitions, not blindly approve all petitions.

 

PHILIPPINES ONLY!!!  CFO (Commission on Filipinos Overseas) INFO - Can't leave home without it!

 

PDOS (Pre-Departure Registration and Orientation Seminar) is for ages 20-59.  Peer Counseling is for 13-19 years of age.

It is required to have the visa in their passport for PDOS and Peer Counseling.

 

GCP (Guidance and Counseling Program) is for K-1 Fiancee and IR/CR-1 spouse ONLY. 

 

 

IMG_5168.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ron12345 said:

If they were given a 221g then it shouldn't matter when they were given a 221g. You are basically arguing that there is no time limit. 

My remark is that the judge did not make any ruling on a pending security check.

Timelines:

ROC:

Spoiler

7/27/20: Sent forms to Dallas lockbox, 7/30/20: Received by USCIS, 8/10 NOA1 electronic notification received, 8/1/ NOA1 hard copy received

AOS:

Spoiler

AOS (I-485 + I-131 + I-765):

9/25/17: sent forms to Chicago, 9/27/17: received by USCIS, 10/4/17: NOA1 electronic notification received, 10/10/17: NOA1 hard copy received. Social Security card being issued in married name (3rd attempt!)

10/14/17: Biometrics appointment notice received, 10/25/17: Biometrics

1/2/18: EAD + AP approved (no website update), 1/5/18: EAD + AP mailed, 1/8/18: EAD + AP approval notice hardcopies received, 1/10/18: EAD + AP received

9/5/18: Interview scheduled notice, 10/17/18: Interview

10/24/18: Green card produced notice, 10/25/18: Formal approval, 10/31/18: Green card received

K-1:

Spoiler

I-129F

12/1/16: sent, 12/14/16: NOA1 hard copy received, 3/10/17: RFE (IMB verification), 3/22/17: RFE response received

3/24/17: Approved! , 3/30/17: NOA2 hard copy received

 

NVC

4/6/2017: Received, 4/12/2017: Sent to Riyadh embassy, 4/16/2017: Case received at Riyadh embassy, 4/21/2017: Request case transfer to Manila, approved 4/24/2017

 

K-1

5/1/2017: Case received by Manila (1 week embassy transfer??? Lucky~)

7/13/2017: Interview: APPROVED!!!

7/19/2017: Visa in hand

8/15/2017: POE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Canada
Timeline

~~Thread locked to further replies as it has been completely derail from the OP's question. The OP is welcomed to start a new thread later for any updates.~~

Spoiler

Met Playing Everquest in 2005
Engaged 9-15-2006
K-1 & 4 K-2'S
Filed 05-09-07
Interview 03-12-08
Visa received 04-21-08
Entry 05-06-08
Married 06-21-08
AOS X5
Filed 07-08-08
Cards Received01-22-09
Roc X5
Filed 10-17-10
Cards Received02-22-11
Citizenship
Filed 10-17-11
Interview 01-12-12
Oath 06-29-12

Citizenship for older 2 boys

Filed 03/08/2014

NOA/fee waiver 03/19/2014

Biometrics 04/15/14

Interview 05/29/14

In line for Oath 06/20/14

Oath 09/19/2014 We are all done! All USC no more USCIS

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Didn't find the answer you were looking for? Ask our VJ Immigration Lawyers.
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...