FAQ about our Baghdad DV-2022 lawsuit: if successful, will the lawsuit benefit just plaintiffs or all affected?

Answer: That depends upon what the judge orders and how State Department implements the order. In the past, we have seen non-class action lawsuits have outcomes that were for plaintiffs only (Young, Gomez I (giving named plaintiffs priority), Goodluck II, Goh), and outcomes that were for all affected (Goodluck I, Rai). So that’s difficult to predict.

#SantosvBiden Update. Judge Cogan has issued an order consolidating Santos with Sunny, and putting government’s deadline on hold.

Our law firm represents many US immigrant visa holders (Diversity Visa lottery winners) from Turkmenistan whose visas will expire and their immigration journeys will end if they are unable to exit the country. Help us out with a retweet to raise awareness with Turkmenistan authorities. Thanks!
https://twitter.com/curtisatlaw/status/1467920590652596225?s=20

#DV2022 FAQ: KCC tells me I must wait until I receive the document request to submit documents and you tell me to submit before receiving request. Who should I believe?

Answer: You have a choice. You can believe what KCC tells you, or you can believe what attorneys representing KCC tell a federal judge. Since the latter could give you a potential advantage, I recommend that.
https://t.me/lawofficeofcurtismorrison/2264

#DV2020 Update: Over the weekend, I emailed government attorney reminding him that several DV-2020 selectees find themselves physically in the US and want to know whether adjustment of status will be an option for the reserved Gomez visas.

He responded today to let me know his clients, State Dept and USCIS, are still discussing that issue. So remain patient.

Note: Only 6 days left for Iraqi #DV2022 selectees assigned to Baghdad to sign up for our lawsuit for the failure to transfer application barrier. You must get on the train before it leaves the station! 🚂
https://morrisonurena.com/dv-2022-baghdad

New information: just heard a IV Chief of a US Consulate reveal that NVC has had "systems issues" related to scheduling interviews since early fall that are not expected to be resolved before February or March.

For this reason, US Cuidad Juarez, for example, has taken over scheduling themselves for immigrant visa applicants assigned to that embassy. It is unclear whether any other embassy have done the same.

(Added Note: I hear a lot of DVs assuming this impacts them and we don’t know that. The Chief is from Juarez, where they process only a negligible number of DVs per year.)

#DV2020 #GomezvBiden update: attorney Cleland B. Welton has withdrawn his appearance as Gomez plaintiffs' counsel. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DHAtOYql_mex8EbbNYQkJTL1AfNOU7iH/view?usp=sharing

Sunny/Wilson/Santos Update: we've filed this pre-motion letter requesting Judge Cogan's leave to file a motion for expedited discovery of the administrative record related to the alleged rescission of the tiered prioritization scheme.

Also, remember we have a status conference set for tomorrow, December 9, at 4:30 pm EST (1:30 pm PST) that you can call in and listen to:
 
Public audio access:
888-684-8852
access code 6427877#

DV/KCC policy update! DVs no longer have to send scans to KCC. They will collect your documents at interview.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/News/visas-news/diversity-visa-2022-update.html

Sunny/Wilson/Santos Update: Alex Scott Weinberg has withdrawn his appearance as counsel for government defendants.
Also, reminder: status conference starts in a little more than 2 hours.

FAQ: How could a motion for expedited discovery in the Santos lawsuit help?

Answer: The government alleges that they have rescinded the tiered approach, but they haven't proved it by producing the ALDAC cable that implemented the rescission. The goal of discovery is to make the government produce the ALDAC cable to prove what they are alleging. Based upon our past experience (especially in Jacob), when State Department implements a change in policy, they generally start breaking the law in a new way. Finding out more about that helps guide our next steps in litigation.

Sunny/Wilson/Santos Update - This is the briefing schedule that Judge Cogan set today for the government's next motion to dismiss. Their motion is due December 23. Our opposition is due Jan. 14, and government's reply is due Jan. 24.

#DV2022 Update: While the KCC updated their document submission policy yesterday, they didn't update the instructions on their automatic response email. I think KCC is managed by clowns who could not get a job at a respectable circus. 🤡 Anyway, I have sent a tweet to draw attention their incompetence.
https://twitter.com/curtisatlaw/status/1469357854565883911

Attention #GoodluckvBiden Plaintiffs: Our 65-page opposition to the government's motion for summary judgment and our own cross motion for summary judgment is due December 20. The quality of this brief determines whether the reserved visas will become issued visas.

I'm kindly requesting that you do not distract me or our staff in the next 7 days with hypothetical questions, and let us focus on the work that you need us to do to get you what you want. Thanks.🙏

“Biden ran on a platform that said he was going to increase the number of diversity visa allotments, but he's fighting the ones that were allotted. It doesn't make sense."

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2021/12/08/immigration-visa-lottery-barriers/4121638981725/

DV2020 Update: Anti-immigrant Biden administration appeals another order in favor of immigrants. This time- the Gomez order.

Note: a notice of an appeal does not stop the implementation of an order. That would take a “stay,” which is a little more difficult.

#DV2020 excellent thread 🧵 by Gomez class counsel.

https://twitter.com/karentumlin/status/1469477307915988995?s=21

#DV2020 FAQ: What in the Gomez order is government appealing?

Answer: We won’t know until they file their opening brief, and we won’t even know when that’s due for a week or so. It probably won’t be due for a month.

If I had to guess, I’d say they’re appealing Judge Mehta’s finding that an entry ban under 212(f) cannot be used as an issuance ban. It’s obvious that they still think it can, as they’re currently using entry ban against South Africa as an issuance ban.

They may also appeal the court’s authority to order the issuance of DVs after fiscal year deadline, but that’s going to be uphill for them as they’ve lost a related battle once already in the Almaqrami appeal a few years ago.
-curtis

DV2020 update: For those who want to see the actual notice of appeal, here it is.

Reminder: Please do not contact the government attorneys or the court directly about pending litigation. That causes nothing but problems. Thanks. 🙏