Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Title 8 USC 1571

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

  • Title 8 USC 1571

    Hello,

    I have a question concerning Title 8 USC 1571 of the US code. I just came across it in the case of Mohamed Ali vs. Michael Mukasey available at http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Ali%203-7-08.pdf

    I am wondering if it is applicable to only applications on I-485 or does it extend to N-400 and other applications. Why has no one evoked that code (I never heard about it until yesterday.
    Please I am asking a serious question. If you do not know the answer, do some research before posting.

    THanks

  • #2
    Hello,

    I have a question concerning Title 8 USC 1571 of the US code. I just came across it in the case of Mohamed Ali vs. Michael Mukasey available at http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Ali%203-7-08.pdf

    I am wondering if it is applicable to only applications on I-485 or does it extend to N-400 and other applications. Why has no one evoked that code (I never heard about it until yesterday.
    Please I am asking a serious question. If you do not know the answer, do some research before posting.

    THanks

    Comment


    • #3
      I don't know which is more ridiculous; 1) that a court would approve anyone with the first name Mohamed or 2) or anyone with the boxers' name Mohamed Ali; I thought this was a joke at first LOL
      These people stop at Nothing !

      Death to IMBRA AND VAWA !

      God Bless America and no one else !!!

      Comment


      • #4
        <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Michaelthegreat:
        I don't know which is more ridiculous; 1) that a court would approve anyone with the first name Mohamed or 2) or anyone with the boxers' name Mohamed Ali; I thought this was a joke at first LOL </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

        Do you really have a job michaelthegreat? And by the way, your suggestions on killing may be a joke to you, but I will advise you to be more careful before your words come back to haunt you.

        Comment


        • #5
          Why would it be merely limited to I-485s? It concerns the USCIS' duty to process applications in an efficient and timely manner. See, Writ of Mandamus. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by THoughful:
          Hello,

          I have a question concerning Title 8 USC 1571 of the US code. I just came across it in the case of Mohamed Ali vs. Michael Mukasey available at http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Ali%203-7-08.pdf

          I am wondering if it is applicable to only applications on I-485 or does it extend to N-400 and other applications. Why has no one evoked that code (I never heard about it until yesterday.
          Please I am asking a serious question. If you do not know the answer, do some research before posting.

          THanks </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

          Comment


          • #6
            SO why has no one invoked it? In all the cases, the USCIS has only one argument (which most of the time doesn't pass with the judge): congress has not set any time limit for applications

            Comment


            • #7
              Didn't they just put out a memo that in the case of no compelling evidence otherwise that were going to approve these name checks?
              "Being all fashioned of the self-same dust let us be merciful as well as just"
              Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

              Comment


              • #8
                Yes but only applies to certain applications. N-400 applications were not included


                <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by republicanwriter:
                Didn't they just put out a memo that in the case of no compelling evidence otherwise that were going to approve these name checks? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                Comment



                Working...
                X