N400 2 year delay. How do I solve?

[Imperium 81]

8 hours ago, igoyougoduke said:

these letters have no legal value....i highly doubt they work .. if letters and phone calls work than USCIS would not have a processing time of 20/30 months 

It has worked several times. 

[Imperium 81]

8 hours ago, igoyougoduke said:

wait what ? judges can approve naturalization cases . i have never heard that.. I thought only USCIS has the authority to approve a naturalization application. His N-400 has not been denied so how will a judge approve his case ?

U.S.C 8, Section 1447(b) grants a USDC judge popwer to naturalize  an applicant.

Main difference in WOM and an action under 1447(b) is that WOM grants USCIS a concurrent jurisdiction while Section 1447(b) strips USCIS of a jurisdiction and vests it into a USDC. 

WOM can be a tool for any Administrative Delay because it allows a judge to force an employee to do their job.

 

For a Writ of Mandamus lawsuit, one needs to demonstrate three things:

a-. you have a clear right to the relief sought
b-. the defendants have a clear, non-discretionary duty to act within reasonable period of time
c. no other remedy is available

 

Section 1447(b) is a remedy available only to naturalization applicants who have had,

a- Their Interview,

b-It has been 120 days after that interview,

c- USCIS has not made a determination on that application.

In this case, once a USDC assumes jurisdiction, it can remand the matter to USCIS time bounding them to make a decision (most cases are resolved at pre-trial stage by ASUA) or sets a date for a hearing to conduct de novo review of an application and naturalize the applicant. If an applicant has a clear prevailing party(through representation, not Pro Se) they can also be granted attorney fee etc.

 

[Imperium 81]

8 hours ago, Mike E said:

So, not a lawyer.  You are certain this letter won’t damage a case for de novo review?

It is not a part of formal complaint or WOM, so no.

[Mike E 11,739]

29 minutes ago, Imperium said:

It is not a part of formal complaint or WOM, so no.

Let’s see it

[Verrou 1,962]

11 hours ago, Mike E said:

This isn’t a gc interview

Demand letter is still demand letter IMO 

OP already did the interview, just wait for the adjudication 

[sung2408 2]

12 minutes ago, Misscloud said:

Demand letter is still demand letter IMO 

OP already did the interview, just wait for the adjudication 

No. I have not had my N400 interview. I have been waiting for a reschedule notice since feb 2022. 

[sung2408 2]

12 hours ago, Imperium said:

Would it not be feasiable to send a "Demand Letter" to his local USA (instead of writing to Ombud) indicating his intent to file a complaint in the USDC? After all, OP intends to minimize any further delays. 

It is USA office who eventually caliberates the pressure on USCIS for a prompt adjudication. This may end up solving his issue because many USA dont want to add more work on their shoulders and resolve the matter before it creates an electronic file at DOJ.

Do you have a copy or sample of this demand letter?

[Mike E 11,739]

Delete

Edited May 19, 2023 by Mike E

[Mike E 11,739]

11 hours ago, igoyougoduke said:

wait what ? judges can approve naturalization cases . i have never heard that.. I thought only USCIS has the authority to approve a naturalization application. His N-400 has not been denied so how will a judge approve his case ?

https://www.ilcm.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Sample-2.pdf

 

OP is now saying that there was no interview. So my understanding is de novo review is out for now. WoM + APA after ombudsman is the correct action.

[Imperium 81]

33 minutes ago, sung2408 said:

No. I have not had my N400 interview. I have been waiting for a reschedule notice since feb 2022. 

 

33 minutes ago, sung2408 said:

Do you have a copy or sample of this demand letter?

Since you have not had your interview, a Demand Letter will not serve your purpose. 

[Dashinka 24,481]

4 hours ago, Imperium said:

U.S.C 8, Section 1447(b) grants a USDC judge popwer to naturalize  an applicant.

Main difference in WOM and an action under 1447(b) is that WOM grants USCIS a concurrent jurisdiction while Section 1447(b) strips USCIS of a jurisdiction and vests it into a USDC. 

WOM can be a tool for any Administrative Delay because it allows a judge to force an employee to do their job.

 

For a Writ of Mandamus lawsuit, one needs to demonstrate three things:

a-. you have a clear right to the relief sought
b-. the defendants have a clear, non-discretionary duty to act within reasonable period of time
c. no other remedy is available

 

Section 1447(b) is a remedy available only to naturalization applicants who have had,

a- Their Interview,

b-It has been 120 days after that interview,

c- USCIS has not made a determination on that application.

In this case, once a USDC assumes jurisdiction, it can remand the matter to USCIS time bounding them to make a decision (most cases are resolved at pre-trial stage by ASUA) or sets a date for a hearing to conduct de novo review of an application and naturalize the applicant. If an applicant has a clear prevailing party(through representation, not Pro Se) they can also be granted attorney fee etc.

 

Since the OP has not actually had an interview, wouldn't this be an issue.  I may be mis-interpreting the OP message, but it seemed they showed up for the interview back in 2022, but was notified it was going to be re-scheduled since documents were not yet received. 

21 minutes ago, Imperium said:

 

Since you have not had your interview, a Demand Letter will not serve your purpose. 

Sorry, I guess I should have read down further first.

[Boiler 45,449]

Just now, Dashinka said:

Since the OP has not actually had an interview, wouldn't this be an issue.  I may be mis-interpreting the OP message, but it seemed they showed up for the interview back in 2022, but was notified it was going to be re-scheduled since documents were not yet received. 

Sorry, I guess I should have read down further first.

 

Just now, Dashinka said:

Since the OP has not actually had an interview, wouldn't this be an issue.  I may be mis-interpreting the OP message, but it seemed they showed up for the interview back in 2022, but was notified it was going to be re-scheduled since documents were not yet received. 

Sorry, I guess I should have read down further first.

I took it that they attended the interview, what USCIS asked or did not I am not sure is relevant.

[Mike E 11,739]

12 minutes ago, Boiler said:

 

I took it that they attended the interview, what USCIS asked or did not I am not sure is relevant.

 

1 hour ago, sung2408 said:

No. I have not had my N400 interview. I have been waiting for a reschedule notice since feb 2022. 

So no interview. De novo is out because the law requires an interview. I believe WoM is out because WoM is a demand for a decision, and there can be no decision without an interview. 
 

That would leave APA, but my understanding is: 

* All administrative processes have to be exhausted before a judge would rule for the plaintiff

* All administrative processes have not been exhausted because OP has not tried CIS ombudsman

* the crowd here is saying to not try CIS ombudsman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Boiler 45,449]

On 5/18/2023 at 6:07 AM, sung2408 said:

I was invited to show up for my interview scheduled for Feb 2022. When I showed up, the officer mentioned my a-file was not at field office so a reschedule letter will be sent to me once a-file shows up.

Seems pretty clear, he went to his interview.

[Verrou 1,962]

1 hour ago, sung2408 said:

No. I have not had my N400 interview. I have been waiting for a reschedule notice since feb 2022. 

I thought u already got the interview last year

Edited May 19, 2023 by Misscloud