desitechie
10-05 01:40 PM
I am not talking about calling cards. ALLVOI is also a VOIP service like Vonage and has the same deal on free US calls etc. However, their India pkg is much better IMO.
Hows ALLVOI quality compared to Vonage for India calls?
Hows their customer service?
I know Vonage's CS is bad.
Thanks
Hows ALLVOI quality compared to Vonage for India calls?
Hows their customer service?
I know Vonage's CS is bad.
Thanks
wallpaper Kristen Stewart - 2011 MTV
whitecollarslave
01-11 02:31 PM
Guys the race is on! Anti immigrants are onto our campaign. see this link!
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-97988.html
Are you ready for the showdown? Lets send as many letters as we can!!
I don't understand where is the conflict here. The website above - ALIPAC - is "Americans for Legal Immigration". From what I read in their website, they want to stop illegal immigration and they support legal immigration. Unless they have a hidden agenda, they should be supporting IV's letter campaign.
How is this in conflict? Am I missing something?
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-97988.html
Are you ready for the showdown? Lets send as many letters as we can!!
I don't understand where is the conflict here. The website above - ALIPAC - is "Americans for Legal Immigration". From what I read in their website, they want to stop illegal immigration and they support legal immigration. Unless they have a hidden agenda, they should be supporting IV's letter campaign.
How is this in conflict? Am I missing something?
Openarms
03-12 05:39 PM
The problem with IV core is they want to solve all the problems at once...which never going to happen... I really do not understand why they are not making this as an Action item and raise donations. let us make this sri1309 letter final and start sending it to congress (house, sensate members)
2011 2011 MTV Movie Awards - Red
appas123
08-13 08:03 AM
Ok. I will try giving you a call this weekend. Afternoon works best for me. Let me know if that is fine with you.
Forgot that today is Friday. I could call you today afternoon if you want.
Forgot that today is Friday. I could call you today afternoon if you want.
more...
ssamineni
09-09 07:28 AM
Got 485 approvals yesterday for me and my wife. Thank you so much IV for everything
eb3_2004
09-10 08:11 AM
Called all of them y'day...
Good Luck to all...
Good Luck to all...
more...
wandmaker
01-09 06:39 PM
Now long awaited Feb 08 bulletin is out and the dates are as expected. It is time for all IVans (including guests) to help IV to succeed in the campaign. Focus your energy, spread the word, make others do the same - IV will help us succeed.
2010 Kristen Stewart 2011 MTV Movie
pranju
06-15 11:59 AM
yes you are correct .. but if you have them ( photocopy ) no harm in including .. just to show that u have maintained a legal status through out ..
any help in employment letter please
any help in employment letter please
more...
cooldude0807
08-16 02:02 PM
As far as my knowledge goes, there is no streamline email for NSC. We did send emails to NSCSfollowup and SCOPPSCAT .. and got standard script response for both.
Is it NSCSfollowup.nsc@dhs.gov or NCSCfollowup.nsc@dhs.gov?
Is it NSCSfollowup.nsc@dhs.gov or NCSCfollowup.nsc@dhs.gov?
hair Kristen Stewart 2011 MTV Movie
Milind123
01-24 03:56 PM
Looks like they forgot to ask to attach the following :):):):)
1) Copies of all your certificates
2) Your latest offer letter
3) Pay stubs for last six months
4) Tax returns
5) Letter of introduction from the employer
6) Latest Resume
7) 3 Recommendation letters
8) Family photo with Mother, Father, spouse, kids , siblings. While background, taken less than 6 months ago. Frontal view :)
Avoid them at all costs....
Good one. But don't give those fools any more ideas. They have already started a new project to incorporate the above "points" in their next version.
1) Copies of all your certificates
2) Your latest offer letter
3) Pay stubs for last six months
4) Tax returns
5) Letter of introduction from the employer
6) Latest Resume
7) 3 Recommendation letters
8) Family photo with Mother, Father, spouse, kids , siblings. While background, taken less than 6 months ago. Frontal view :)
Avoid them at all costs....
Good one. But don't give those fools any more ideas. They have already started a new project to incorporate the above "points" in their next version.
more...
Canadian_Dream
11-25 02:52 PM
Sledge_Hammer:
I agree with you the whole thing was set for a collapse and personal responsibility and other ethos have disappeared long time ago. In my opinion the fundamental problem is money created from debt. The backbone of entire modern economic system is based on creating money from debt. Check out this and you will know how leveraged the entire system is (not just real estate).
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279
Unfortunately we are all caught in it with only solution to fix is time travel and kill the beast in infancy. There is vested interest by the Govt and Banks to lend because that's the only way money is created. That explains constant rate cut cycle and stimulating artificial growth. The entire monetary system is hijacked by banks. The debt to ordinary people drives the economy and people pay that debt and interest a good part of their life. Thus collapse of big banks could lead to eventual meltdown of the system, and no wonder govt keeps bailing them out.
In the end personal level frugal living and debt free people are constantly punished by taxing interest like ordinary income and no tax breaks. On the other hand big over leveraged spenders are rewarded with big tax breaks. Why ? Because it allows the well-oiled machinery to work.
In last 10-12 months, this overworked (overstretched) machinery broke down because the debt (and interest) is no longer paid back. Banking system of the entire countries start to fail (Iceland, Latvia, Hungry...). What happens next is anybody's guess, but we will be collateral damage, mine and your savings will be eroded by diminished buying power due to currency printed to bail out the fundamentally flawed system.
The sharp decline in moral and ethics is a direct result of entitlement mentality and welfare society. People feel that they deserve everything without having to pay it back and everyone who is better off must be evil. They forget that simple hardworking people can be rich by simply living debt free and with in the means.
Finally the money from debt driven system might survive but not without huge decline in standard of living, a massive recession and permanent shift away from material possession as a central theme of life.
It would have been ideal if they mandated 1:5 ratio. Unfortunately, with lax lending standards and unregulated banking, people made almost zero down payment (instead of the normal 20%) and bought into loans they couldn't afford in the first place.
I would still blame the borrower 95% for all the mess.
I agree with you the whole thing was set for a collapse and personal responsibility and other ethos have disappeared long time ago. In my opinion the fundamental problem is money created from debt. The backbone of entire modern economic system is based on creating money from debt. Check out this and you will know how leveraged the entire system is (not just real estate).
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279
Unfortunately we are all caught in it with only solution to fix is time travel and kill the beast in infancy. There is vested interest by the Govt and Banks to lend because that's the only way money is created. That explains constant rate cut cycle and stimulating artificial growth. The entire monetary system is hijacked by banks. The debt to ordinary people drives the economy and people pay that debt and interest a good part of their life. Thus collapse of big banks could lead to eventual meltdown of the system, and no wonder govt keeps bailing them out.
In the end personal level frugal living and debt free people are constantly punished by taxing interest like ordinary income and no tax breaks. On the other hand big over leveraged spenders are rewarded with big tax breaks. Why ? Because it allows the well-oiled machinery to work.
In last 10-12 months, this overworked (overstretched) machinery broke down because the debt (and interest) is no longer paid back. Banking system of the entire countries start to fail (Iceland, Latvia, Hungry...). What happens next is anybody's guess, but we will be collateral damage, mine and your savings will be eroded by diminished buying power due to currency printed to bail out the fundamentally flawed system.
The sharp decline in moral and ethics is a direct result of entitlement mentality and welfare society. People feel that they deserve everything without having to pay it back and everyone who is better off must be evil. They forget that simple hardworking people can be rich by simply living debt free and with in the means.
Finally the money from debt driven system might survive but not without huge decline in standard of living, a massive recession and permanent shift away from material possession as a central theme of life.
It would have been ideal if they mandated 1:5 ratio. Unfortunately, with lax lending standards and unregulated banking, people made almost zero down payment (instead of the normal 20%) and bought into loans they couldn't afford in the first place.
I would still blame the borrower 95% for all the mess.
hot 2011 MTV Movie Awards -
rajsat
10-01 11:58 PM
Both notices say september28
more...
house Kristen Stewart - 2011 MTV
amsgc
06-16 12:33 PM
Thanks gcnirvana.
I have a copy of my approved I-140, and the only number I see on it is Receipt Number at the top left side of the notice. It reads like LIN-xx-xxx-xxxxx.
Is this the A# number you are referring to?
That is your receipt number. In my case, the A# is in the box that has the name of the beneficiary.
Ams
I have a copy of my approved I-140, and the only number I see on it is Receipt Number at the top left side of the notice. It reads like LIN-xx-xxx-xxxxx.
Is this the A# number you are referring to?
That is your receipt number. In my case, the A# is in the box that has the name of the beneficiary.
Ams
tattoo 2011 MTV Movie Awards Winners
jasmin45
07-13 07:12 AM
Sorry if a thread already exist to track Lou Dobbs statements and speculations on CNN about Immigration and other issues. Looked around since yesterday but could not find any.
As Greg Siskind suggested,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The best thing I think you can do is to aggressively fact check him. He should be monitored every night and every statement in his immigration stories should be researched to determine accuracy. The most effective way he has been dealt with is the way 60 Minutes did it when they reported on some seriously incorrect statements he reported. He gets EXTREMELY defensive when he's questioned on his factual reporting.
It's hard to attack him just for his opinions. But CNN holds itself out as a credible news organizations and they are sensitive on these issues.
If there was a team of people who know immigration issues well and if we could find regular examples of false statements, I think the pressure would increase. Such documentation would also help for pursuing any efforts to get advertisers to pull out from the show."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request members to post all the statements from Lou Dobbs on this thread. Also request members to run a fact check on his wild speculations and include them along.
As Greg Siskind suggested,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The best thing I think you can do is to aggressively fact check him. He should be monitored every night and every statement in his immigration stories should be researched to determine accuracy. The most effective way he has been dealt with is the way 60 Minutes did it when they reported on some seriously incorrect statements he reported. He gets EXTREMELY defensive when he's questioned on his factual reporting.
It's hard to attack him just for his opinions. But CNN holds itself out as a credible news organizations and they are sensitive on these issues.
If there was a team of people who know immigration issues well and if we could find regular examples of false statements, I think the pressure would increase. Such documentation would also help for pursuing any efforts to get advertisers to pull out from the show."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request members to post all the statements from Lou Dobbs on this thread. Also request members to run a fact check on his wild speculations and include them along.
more...
pictures 2011 MTV Movie Awards will be
iak1973
04-01 12:48 PM
India/China Quota numbers � Update | Klasko, Rulon, Stock & Seltzer, LLP: Blog (http://blog.klaskolaw.com/2011/04/01/indiachina-quota-numbers-update/)
India/China Quota numbers � Update
April 1st, 2011 by William Stock
While the USCIS numbers of pending I-485 make me relatively pessimistic on movement for India and China EB-2, the State Department�s internal case management staff are feeling more optimistic. In fact, we are seeing the National Visa Center issue fee bills for EB-2 India immigrant visa files with priority dates as late as November 2007, which would seem to indicate that NVC, at least, thinks the visa numbers will move at least that far ahead this year.
A caveat against reading too much into the NVC action: recall that it was imperfect information-sharing between USCIS and the State Department that led to the July 2007 �Visagate� debacle, and NVC likely has a small minority of the overall number of visa petitions with India and China EB priority dates in 2006 and early 2007, since so many of those beneficiaries could file for adjustment of status in July of 2007.
It�s also possible that NVC is simply trying to get cases set up with fees paid and documents submitted in case the numbers stay current for the rest of the fiscal year � but applicants would lose their filing fees if the numbers retrogress later this year.
We will have to wait for the May Visa Bulletin from the State Department, likely released by April 13 or so, for more detailed information on the State Department�s thinking.
Counting the dates..... Thank you all in IV team; great work
India/China Quota numbers � Update
April 1st, 2011 by William Stock
While the USCIS numbers of pending I-485 make me relatively pessimistic on movement for India and China EB-2, the State Department�s internal case management staff are feeling more optimistic. In fact, we are seeing the National Visa Center issue fee bills for EB-2 India immigrant visa files with priority dates as late as November 2007, which would seem to indicate that NVC, at least, thinks the visa numbers will move at least that far ahead this year.
A caveat against reading too much into the NVC action: recall that it was imperfect information-sharing between USCIS and the State Department that led to the July 2007 �Visagate� debacle, and NVC likely has a small minority of the overall number of visa petitions with India and China EB priority dates in 2006 and early 2007, since so many of those beneficiaries could file for adjustment of status in July of 2007.
It�s also possible that NVC is simply trying to get cases set up with fees paid and documents submitted in case the numbers stay current for the rest of the fiscal year � but applicants would lose their filing fees if the numbers retrogress later this year.
We will have to wait for the May Visa Bulletin from the State Department, likely released by April 13 or so, for more detailed information on the State Department�s thinking.
Counting the dates..... Thank you all in IV team; great work
dresses 2011 MTV Movie Awards -
chanduv23
09-21 09:38 AM
Approved on Sep 10th, got physical cards on Sep 20th. Best wishes to all who are still in the journey.
more...
makeup 2011 MTV Movie Awards: Kristen
snathan
03-31 11:48 AM
53,872 ( EB2 Total allocation in 2010 ) = Some X (EB2 ROW usage is say X) + 19,961 ( Total India received in 2010) + 6,505( Total China's received in 2010)
==>> X =[B] 53,872 -19,961-6,505 ==> X= 27406
==>> So Total EB2 ROW usage in 2010 is = 27,406
-----------------
1)EB2 I & C Usage = 19,961+ 6,505 = 26466.
2)Visas due to Spill Over for EB2 I & C = 26466 - 5,604 (EB2 (I&C) Regular quota {2*(40,040*7%)} ) = 20,862
3) Visas due to spill over for EB2 India only in 2010 = 26,466 (EB2 I & C Usage ) - 2,802(EB2-I Regular quota {40,040*7%} ) - 6,505 (EB2 China Total Usage) = 17,159.
-------------------
1) In 2011 according the USCIS statement we are getting 12,000 spill over visas in MAY.
Out of that about 10,000 will be allocated to India.
Reason: India PD based on April bulletin = 08 May 2006,
China PD Based on April bulletin = 22 Jul 2006
India has to get cleared 3 months (May Jun and Jul) before the spill over allocated to China.
The average demand for EB2 India is about 1.5k/Month.
which takes 3*1.5 = 4.5 K visas.
The remaining Visas = 7.5 K
The average demand for EB2 China is about 700/ Monnth.
The Total demand for EB2 India & China together from Aug 2006 will be about 2.2k/Month.
So 7.5K will clear about 3.5 months of EB2 I&C from Aug 2006.
So The May bulletin takes the EB2 I & C to November 2006 Or December 2006 as we also get the regular monthly quota of 2*(40,040*7%)
-------
Just my assumption. God only knows how USCIS moves the dates in May.
.
Thanks for the info....I believe it will be either Dec 2006 or Jan 2007
==>> X =[B] 53,872 -19,961-6,505 ==> X= 27406
==>> So Total EB2 ROW usage in 2010 is = 27,406
-----------------
1)EB2 I & C Usage = 19,961+ 6,505 = 26466.
2)Visas due to Spill Over for EB2 I & C = 26466 - 5,604 (EB2 (I&C) Regular quota {2*(40,040*7%)} ) = 20,862
3) Visas due to spill over for EB2 India only in 2010 = 26,466 (EB2 I & C Usage ) - 2,802(EB2-I Regular quota {40,040*7%} ) - 6,505 (EB2 China Total Usage) = 17,159.
-------------------
1) In 2011 according the USCIS statement we are getting 12,000 spill over visas in MAY.
Out of that about 10,000 will be allocated to India.
Reason: India PD based on April bulletin = 08 May 2006,
China PD Based on April bulletin = 22 Jul 2006
India has to get cleared 3 months (May Jun and Jul) before the spill over allocated to China.
The average demand for EB2 India is about 1.5k/Month.
which takes 3*1.5 = 4.5 K visas.
The remaining Visas = 7.5 K
The average demand for EB2 China is about 700/ Monnth.
The Total demand for EB2 India & China together from Aug 2006 will be about 2.2k/Month.
So 7.5K will clear about 3.5 months of EB2 I&C from Aug 2006.
So The May bulletin takes the EB2 I & C to November 2006 Or December 2006 as we also get the regular monthly quota of 2*(40,040*7%)
-------
Just my assumption. God only knows how USCIS moves the dates in May.
.
Thanks for the info....I believe it will be either Dec 2006 or Jan 2007
girlfriend 2011 MTV Movie Awards - Red
mbartosik
06-15 01:36 PM
I filed a G28 to allow me to represent my wife. I did not use an attorney. If you are filing for more than one person then I think that a G28 is worth it. It is a trivial form.
hairstyles Kristen Stewart - 2011 MTV
reddymjm
08-21 10:10 AM
!!!!!!!!!!!!!Not all cell phones are included!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Only these are included in free calling.
----------
India 91 FREE $0.17
India (Cellular & Premium) 919, 9192-4, 9197-9 FREE $0.18
India - Ahmedabad 9179 FREE $0.17
India - Andrah Pradesh (Cellular & Premium) 919440, 919848-9, 919885 FREE $0.16
India - Bangalore 9180 FREE $0.18
India - Baroda 91265 FREE $0.17
India - Calcutta 9133 FREE $0.17
India - Chennai (Madras) 9144 FREE $0.18
India - Ernakulam 91484 FREE $0.15
India - Gujurat 9126-8 FREE $0.17
India - Hyderabad 9140 FREE $0.18
India - Jallandhar 91181 FREE $0.15
India - Mumbai (Bombay) 9122 FREE $0.17
India - New Delhi 9111 FREE $0.17
India - Pune 9120 FREE $0.18
India - Punjab 9116-8, 91162, 91164-5, 91170, 91176, 91178-9, 91183, 91185-6, 91188, 91191-2, 91197, 91199, 911610-2, 911614-9, 911630-4, 911636-9, 911676, 911682, 911685, 911720-2, 911724-9, 911820-5, 911827-9, 911870, 911872-9, 911890-1, 911893, 911895-08, 911985 FREE $0.18
India - Punjab (Cellular & Premium) 919814-5, 919872 FREE $0.18
India - Tamil Nadu (Cellular & Premium) 919444, 919840-1, 919884 FREE
Only these are included in free calling.
----------
India 91 FREE $0.17
India (Cellular & Premium) 919, 9192-4, 9197-9 FREE $0.18
India - Ahmedabad 9179 FREE $0.17
India - Andrah Pradesh (Cellular & Premium) 919440, 919848-9, 919885 FREE $0.16
India - Bangalore 9180 FREE $0.18
India - Baroda 91265 FREE $0.17
India - Calcutta 9133 FREE $0.17
India - Chennai (Madras) 9144 FREE $0.18
India - Ernakulam 91484 FREE $0.15
India - Gujurat 9126-8 FREE $0.17
India - Hyderabad 9140 FREE $0.18
India - Jallandhar 91181 FREE $0.15
India - Mumbai (Bombay) 9122 FREE $0.17
India - New Delhi 9111 FREE $0.17
India - Pune 9120 FREE $0.18
India - Punjab 9116-8, 91162, 91164-5, 91170, 91176, 91178-9, 91183, 91185-6, 91188, 91191-2, 91197, 91199, 911610-2, 911614-9, 911630-4, 911636-9, 911676, 911682, 911685, 911720-2, 911724-9, 911820-5, 911827-9, 911870, 911872-9, 911890-1, 911893, 911895-08, 911985 FREE $0.18
India - Punjab (Cellular & Premium) 919814-5, 919872 FREE $0.18
India - Tamil Nadu (Cellular & Premium) 919444, 919840-1, 919884 FREE
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).
singhsa3
10-17 03:21 PM
Anyone in the similar boat as mine?
I am a july 2nd filer and filed my second application on Aug 15th.
Now that I have got receipts for July 2nd applications, I have put stop payments on the checks on Aug 15th application.
My hope is that my 2nd application will not be processed.
I am a july 2nd filer and filed my second application on Aug 15th.
Now that I have got receipts for July 2nd applications, I have put stop payments on the checks on Aug 15th application.
My hope is that my 2nd application will not be processed.
No comments:
Post a Comment