Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CSS/LULAC Temp. Status denial

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CSS/LULAC Temp. Status denial

    Posted 08-09-2010 07:13 PM
    The Center for Human Rights & Constitutional Law serves as class counsel for persons who apply for legalization or “late amnesty” under the CSS and LULAC/Newman settlements.

    The Center is concerned that CIS adjudicators may be violating the CSS and LULAC/Newman settlements in the following ways:

    1) Misapplication of the preponderance of the evidence standard.

    8 C.F.R. § 245a.12(e) requires CIS to adjudicate legalization applications using the familiar “preponderance of the evidence” standard.
    Class counsel have received reports that CIS adjudicators and the Administrative Appeals Office may be misapplying the preponderance of the evidence standard in the following ways:

    • Finding or inventing some weakness in individual items of documentary evidence of unlawful residence and thereupon declaring such evidence wholly lacking in probative weight.

    • Refusing to give declarations any probative weight because the declarant failed to attach documentary evidence of his or her U.S. residence during the period the declarant confirms a legalization applicant’s residence or presence in the U.S.

    • Declaring declarations devoid of probative weight because the declarant failed to provide non-essential details about the applicant’s employment, physical address, or daily activities.

    This list is not exclusive.

    2) Evading regulatory procedures for termination of temporary resident status.

    8 C.F.R. § 245a.2(u) prescribes the procedure CIS must follow to terminate temporary resident status.

    Class counsel have received reports that rather than follow § 245a.2(u), CIS is, without notice, revisiting CSS and Newman class members’ basic eligibility for lawful temporary residence at the time they appear for interview on applications to adjust from temporary to permanent resident status, finding that temporary residence was improvidently granted, rescinding lawful temporary residence, and denying adjustment to permanent residence.

    Lawyers, advocates and class members are encouraged to report examples of these possible violations off-list to Carlos Holguín, General Counsel, crholguin@centerforhumanrights.org.

    Class members please take note of this post and respond as soon as you can. The Ctr. for Human Rights staff is awaiting to gather more cases to be able to proceed with any action on our behalf.
    Number of valid cases getting denied on hocus pocus grounds could get our cases revisited by the USCIS.

  • #2
    Posted 08-09-2010 07:13 PM
    The Center for Human Rights & Constitutional Law serves as class counsel for persons who apply for legalization or “late amnesty” under the CSS and LULAC/Newman settlements.

    The Center is concerned that CIS adjudicators may be violating the CSS and LULAC/Newman settlements in the following ways:

    1) Misapplication of the preponderance of the evidence standard.

    8 C.F.R. § 245a.12(e) requires CIS to adjudicate legalization applications using the familiar “preponderance of the evidence” standard.
    Class counsel have received reports that CIS adjudicators and the Administrative Appeals Office may be misapplying the preponderance of the evidence standard in the following ways:

    • Finding or inventing some weakness in individual items of documentary evidence of unlawful residence and thereupon declaring such evidence wholly lacking in probative weight.

    • Refusing to give declarations any probative weight because the declarant failed to attach documentary evidence of his or her U.S. residence during the period the declarant confirms a legalization applicant’s residence or presence in the U.S.

    • Declaring declarations devoid of probative weight because the declarant failed to provide non-essential details about the applicant’s employment, physical address, or daily activities.

    This list is not exclusive.

    2) Evading regulatory procedures for termination of temporary resident status.

    8 C.F.R. § 245a.2(u) prescribes the procedure CIS must follow to terminate temporary resident status.

    Class counsel have received reports that rather than follow § 245a.2(u), CIS is, without notice, revisiting CSS and Newman class members’ basic eligibility for lawful temporary residence at the time they appear for interview on applications to adjust from temporary to permanent resident status, finding that temporary residence was improvidently granted, rescinding lawful temporary residence, and denying adjustment to permanent residence.

    Lawyers, advocates and class members are encouraged to report examples of these possible violations off-list to Carlos Holguín, General Counsel, crholguin@centerforhumanrights.org.

    Class members please take note of this post and respond as soon as you can. The Ctr. for Human Rights staff is awaiting to gather more cases to be able to proceed with any action on our behalf.
    Number of valid cases getting denied on hocus pocus grounds could get our cases revisited by the USCIS.

    Comment


    • #3
      so , you think thats why the USCIS mail me notice ?

      I have not received the notice cuz I didnt update my new mailing address ...

      I was shocked to see my case now is in "initial review" again after so many years my case has been denide.

      Im kind worry , very worried about my case now in "initial review" , anything to worry about ?

      do you think they may try to deport everybody who apply with LULAC / CSS .

      I check the court system (BOA) with my A# and the system says "no record found" , little confused.

      Since I didnt get the letter from USCIS I dont know what to think..

      Thank you

      Comment


      • #4
        Where did you find this information ?

        Do you have a link for the website ?

        I looked everywhere for the info you post and cant find it , not in LULAC / HUMAN RIGHTS or any other websites besides this board.

        Thank you.

        Comment


        • #5
          This was originally posted by Carlos from centerhumanrights office. As mentioned earlier u need to contact them and explain ur situation and they can update u with d correct info. And if they r calling you for the interview, I don't think they will deport u under d settlement agreement. As u mentioned you never went for the initial interview. Maybe they are giving d chance to d members who never went for interviews. You need to hire d lawyer before you go for interview. Don't go alone. Good luck.

          Comment


          • #6
            ANY UPDATE????

            Comment



            Working...
            X