Filing lawsuit against the embassy and Uscis

[Kastrs 723]

Just now, Ron12345 said:

Oh yea, what specifically did they do for you? Please expand. 

Ron, You have made several comments on this thread that would lead one to believe you must have some special knowledge or experience with WoM

Perhaps you could share the source of your special knowledge or share your personal experience so that we might all be better informed

[Khallaf 650]

3 minutes ago, Ron12345 said:

Oh yea, what specifically did they do for you? Please expand. 

I contacted my local office for help with in hours of my senators office sending the email he was called to turn back his passport, you will call it a coincidence, and with your small few posts I would say your the argumentative type.

 

Plz stop telling people Senators will not help, they have helped plenty.

 

where ever you are in your journey I wish you luck. 

[carmel34 3,633]

OP, so sorry this is happening to you and I wish you all the blessings of God in resolving it soon.  It was not clear from your posts when you submitted the DS-5535.  Was it in February 2018?  If so, it has not even been one year of waiting, and DS-5535 has a lot of information that takes time to investigate, depending on the circumstances of your case.  DS-5535s are recent, but those I have seen here on VJ, from actual cases, have taken a very long time to resolve, often more than one year.  So you could just wait until February when AP has been in process for a year after DS 5535, then move forward with a lawsuit if you choose to and have the cash to fight it with a good attorney who has experience with this type of case.  At least you are living in the UAE with your husband.  That is a great blessing that most of us do not enjoy.  Count yourself lucky in that regard.  You are together during the long wait and others wait years living apart.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

23 minutes ago, NLZZLN said:

My case started 2014 if u can count its 2019 now. Thank you nothing else i want to say to you. 

October 2014, so more like 4 years given 2019 is only a fortnight old, and a year of that was your intentional delay. So the conclusion of 3 years was correct. And the simple truth is is oct 2014 till Jan 2017 is a shade over 2 years and it could have been finished then. You don’t want to hear it, but to keep on saying (1) your case has been dragging on for 5 years and (2) it’s all embassy fault, are both factually incorrect. People are here to help, but help needs to be based on the facts of the case. 

[Ron12345 16]

Just now, Khallaf said:

I contacted my local office for help with in hours of my senators office sending the email he was called to turn back his passport, you will call it a coincidence, and with your small few posts I would say your the argumentative type.

 

Plz stop telling people Senators will not help, they have helped plenty.

 

where ever you are in your journey I wish you luck. 

 

Not argumentative. I deal in facts. Sounds like the AP was completed and the embassy had not bothered to contact you.

 

I do have personal experience where the congressional office helped me, but they cannot expedite AP. I presume in a life or death situation, they will become more involved. 

[Ron12345 16]

8 minutes ago, Kastrs said:

Ron, You have made several comments on this thread that would lead one to believe you must have some special knowledge or experience with WoM

Perhaps you could share the source of your special knowledge or share your personal experience so that we might all be better informed

At a minimum, let's just say that I have spoken with attorneys who file these regularly. I dont want to expand beyond that at this time.

[Khallaf 650]

1 minute ago, Ron12345 said:

 

Not argumentative. I deal in facts. Sounds like the AP was completed and the embassy had not bothered to contact you.

 

I do have personal experience where the congressional office helped me, but they cannot expedite AP. I presume in a life or death situation, they will become more involved. 

again like I said you will see it as coincidental, up until the day of the email it sat in AP, had it been done before they got the email from Senators office, it would have changed.

 

 

[Ron12345 16]

1 minute ago, Khallaf said:

again like I said you will see it as coincidental, up until the day of the email it sat in AP, had it been done before they got the email from Senators office, it would have changed.

 

 

Every single senate office will tell you that they cant do anything about cases stuck in AP. I know that because I've spoken to my senators offices and been told those exact words. They placed an inquiry for you. Evidently the inquiry made the embassy realize that your case was ready. Or it was a total coincidence. 

[Paul & Mallory 1,398]

16 hours ago, Ron12345 said:

 

What websites? Have you actually spoken to attorneys who specialize in these?

 

Proof of marriage? Like when they suspect fraud or what do you mean? 

 

In 99% of cases the US attorney will contact the embassy and the embassy will expedite so that they do not have to spend resources in court. The end result of the expedite will be the same result as if you waited for them to complete on their own timeline. They do not retaliate. If they deny, there must be a legal justification. These are the facts.

I keep seeing you demand proof/links from people disagreeing with you, but have not seen you provide the same to your benefit.

I have also seen everyone advising WoM as an option, HOWEVER may result in a denial, only state that it COULD be a denial. Not a definitive denial. I think it's safe to say it is possible one would get denied, based on the argument of security checks. Those can only be expedited so much. No one here knows what is causing the hold up on this particular case, or at what stage the hang up has occurred and remained idle at (i.e., has sufficient background check already been completed).

 

 

12 hours ago, Ron12345 said:

A writ does not increase your chances of failure. It has no impact on the final adjudication. In 99% of cases, a writ will guarantee a decision with 2-3 months. If they decide to fight you in court, it's a sign that there is probably something seriously wrong with your background, and your case was in trouble writ or no writ.

The "impact" is the possibility that rushing the decision may result in a negative decision. Again - you keep citing '99%' of cases - where is this documented? Please share examples. I'm sure such examples would alleviate the OP's concerns, if any, with taking this route, as others'.

 

Multiple people have stated, again and again, that the concern with taking this route is that forcing the embassy to make a decision before a conclusive background check has been completed, as REQUIRED, will result in a denial. They will not approve a case that has not been properly security checked. Can we say that is the case with the OP? Of course not. Neither can you. Hence, why it's continuously referred to as a risky CHANCE. As in, POSSIBILITY. And a pretty big possibility, in my opinion.

 

 

9 minutes ago, Kastrs said:

Ron, You have made several comments on this thread that would lead one to believe you must have some special knowledge or experience with WoM

Perhaps you could share the source of your special knowledge or share your personal experience so that we might all be better informed

Wondering the same!

 

 

At the end of the day - viable options have been given for the OP. INCLUDING possible outcomes, which as in most cases can vary depending on the situation. At the end of the day, it will be at the OP's discretion as to whether or not taking escalation options, such as WoM, will be worth it in their case.

It's not anyone's business here as to why your initial extensions were requested. Lord knows I'm sure everyone here should/could have made different decisions along their respective immigration path. Everyone makes their decisions at the time as they see best for that particular time/situation. Best of luck to you and your family.

[Ron12345 16]

2 minutes ago, Paul & Mallory said:

Multiple people have stated, again and again, that the concern with taking this route is that forcing the embassy to make a decision before a conclusive background check has been completed, as REQUIRED, will result in a denial. They will not approve a case that has not been properly security checked. Can we say that is the case with the OP? Of course not. Neither can you. Hence, why it's continuously referred to as a risky CHANCE. As in, POSSIBILITY. And a pretty big possibility, in my opinion.

It would be illegal to deny a case because the govt has not completed its own security processing. They would be sued. They must provide a legal reason for denial. 

[Paul & Mallory 1,398]

Just now, Ron12345 said:

It would be illegal to deny a case because the govt has not completed its own security processing. They would be sued. They must provide a legal reason for denial. 

I think that's the point being made, though - they aren't going to approve a case that has not been security checked/processed. A case that has NOT been checked, per due diligence, could be subject to denial, no?

[JFH 12,190]

17 hours ago, Ron12345 said:

This is wildly inaccurate. If it's stuck in security checks, they will expedite the security checks. They can only deny the visa for a legal reason. 

 

My advice to the OP is to speak to an attorney who specializes in WOM.

They cannot force an external agency to speed up. If the security checks are stuck with an overseas authority, it takes as long as it takes. For example, it they are waiting for a security check from another country because the applicant had travelled to it lived in that country, the writ of mandamus is not going to make that go faster. 

[NLZZLN 6]

14 minutes ago, carmel34 said:

OP, so sorry this is happening to you and I wish you all the blessings of God in resolving it soon.  It was not clear from your posts when you submitted the DS-5535.  Was it in February 2018?  If so, it has not even been one year of waiting, and DS-5535 has a lot of information that takes time to investigate, depending on the circumstances of your case.  DS-5535s are recent, but those I have seen here on VJ, from actual cases, have taken a very long time to resolve, often more than one year.  So you could just wait until February when AP has been in process for a year after DS 5535, then move forward with a lawsuit if you choose to and have the cash to fight it with a good attorney who has experience with this type of case.  At least you are living in the UAE with your husband.  That is a great blessing that most of us do not enjoy.  Count yourself lucky in that regard.  You are together during the long wait and others wait years living apart.

Yes thank god for this that im living with him. I submited ds5535 in november and they told me they didnt recieve it for 3 months i was just sitting and waiting for them to do something about my case then feb when i sent new affidavit of support to add my daughter n follow up on the status they said they didnt get my email which is really sad. 3 months were wasted for nothing. 

[JFH 12,190]

4 minutes ago, Ron12345 said:

It would be illegal to deny a case because the govt has not completed its own security processing. They would be sued. They must provide a legal reason for denial. 

But if it’s an overseas agency holding up the process? 

[Ron12345 16]

1 minute ago, Paul & Mallory said:

I think that's the point being made, though - they aren't going to approve a case that has not been security checked/processed. A case that has NOT been checked, per due diligence, could be subject to denial, no?

They cannot deny because they have not completed their own DD. That's illegal. They could deny if you have known ties to terrorism for example. 

 

What will happen is that they complete their processing. This can be done very, very quickly if they request that it be done so. They very rarely fight these case because the US Attorney's office has limited resources. If someone files mandamus after 1 month, they may fight. If someone has serious issues in their background, they may fight. Otherwise, it's extremely unusual that they fight. Take a look at Pacer and research actual cases. The vast, vast majority say "dismissed by plantiff". It means that the visa was issued. People are far too conservative when it comes to mandamus.

 

I would be hesitant to file if:

1. Cant afford legal fees

2. Have background issues (you maybe more under the microscope)