ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得着了！

[慢慢来]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

谨慎乐观。
CIC是否可以、是否会上诉还不确定。Fei Zhu的情况（5/17被拒？）是否适用于所有3/29~6/29之间打分的也还有争辩余地。拒签在处理过程中是DM。而selection decision仍处于IP阶段，是否可以算作visa officer's decision还有些不确定因素。当然，由于C38本身就拿selection decision作为界限，所以在这一点上我比较乐观。
每个胜利都是在C38上撕开一道口子，好消息越来越多了。

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

谨慎乐观。
CIC是否可以、是否会上诉还不确定。Fei Zhu的情况（5/17被拒？）是否适用于所有3/29~6/29之间打分的也还有争辩余地。拒签在处理过程中是DM。而selection decision仍处于IP阶段，是否可以算作visa officer's decision还有些不确定因素。当然，由于C38本身就拿selection decision作为界限，所以在这一点上我比较乐观。
每个胜利都是在C38上撕开一道口子，好消息越来越多了。

ME被切的确有很多不同的类别，像bbxudavid这样的VISA已经做好了，完全适用于ZHU这个判例，他VISA都做好了，情况和ZHU的拒签都是final decision了，人家拒签都赢了，bbxudavid签证送出来又收回去难道不能赢？至于因为背调等原因，ME后被切，这一类得到selection decision和ZHU的是不是100%完全相同，CIC肯定会有狡辩的余地

 

[雾霾和计划生育都害人]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

你可能误解了我的案子，我应该没有Final decision。当时时间紧急，我按大多数同学的操作实践，未等通知邮寄护照就直接将护照和体检回执寄到使馆，为了赶时间，因为体检结果是6月29日送到北京使馆，我估计没有得到Final decision,使馆应该没有做好Visa，也没有通知我交回（否则，就可以按人道理由继续得到签证的），使馆直接退回未签证的护照并附了一封终止退费说明。

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

你可能误解了我的案子，我应该没有Final decision。当时时间紧急，我按大多数同学的操作实践，未等通知邮寄护照就直接将护照和体检回执寄到使馆，为了赶时间，因为体检结果是6月29日送到北京使馆，我估计没有得到Final decision,使馆应该没有做好Visa，也没有通知我交回（否则，就可以按人道理由继续得到签证的），使馆直接退回未签证的护照并附了一封终止退费说明。

Justice Blanchrd的意思并不是final decision

selection decision就基本决定了是不是拒签和获签，ZHU的SD是拒签negative，你们ME被切的SD则是positive，情况一样。大家注意仔细阅读那几段判决

 

[慢慢来]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

Justice Blanchrd的意思并不是final decision

selection decision就基本决定了是不是拒签和获签，ZHU的SD是拒签negative，你们ME被切的SD则是positive，情况一样。大家注意仔细阅读那几段判决

As a result, until such time as the FSW proposal becomes law, this office will continue to make selection decisions on pre C-50 applications. Your application has been put into process, and a selection decision has been made.
。。。省略。。。
Medical examinations are part of the application process. They do not guarantee the issuance of a visa.

上面是ME信中的摘录。可以看出SD肯定不是一个final decision，也并未完全决定是否获签。而ZHU的情况是拒签（未确定？），拒签就进入DM阶段，这肯定是一个final decision。
而SD是否算作判决所指的VO decision，也不肯定。个人表示乐观，但仍有辩论余地。

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

拒签在处理过程中是DM。而selection decision仍处于IP阶段，。

CIC的律师在这个案子里的辩论就是ZHU是329后SD的，根据87.4，这样的案子要被一刀切(87.4切不切案子，唯一标准是329有没有SD，而不限定其他的什么DM或者IP。)但是Justice Blanchard完全不买账。

这个判决的重要意义在于----有部分群体可以绕开87.4解决问题

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

As a result, until such time as the FSW proposal becomes law, this office will continue to make selection decisions on pre C-50 applications. Your application has been put into process, and a selection decision has been made.
。。。省略。。。
Medical examinations are part of the application process. They do not guarantee the issuance of a visa.

上面是ME信中的摘录。可以看出SD肯定不是一个final decision，也并未完全决定是否获签。而ZHU的情况是拒签（未确定？），拒签就进入DM阶段，这肯定是一个final decision。
而SD是否算作判决所指的VO decision，也不肯定。个人表示乐观，但仍有辩论余地。

法官认为

The provision （也就是87.4）expressly deals
with undecided applications, not decisions.

ME被切的显然不是undecided applications，如果没有decided，怎么发了ME？

再来理解法官的话，87.4针对的是尚未审理尚未决定的案件，而不是（VO的）decisions，无论是selection decision还是final decision，都是decision，而不是undecided applications

 

[慢慢来]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

SD是处理过程中的一个中间结果。ME信中已经说得很清楚了。而这样一个中间结果毕竟和最终的Decision Made有所不同。这样一个中间结果是否符合判决所指validly rendered visa officer's decision还需要经过律师的辩论和法官的最终认定。
再重申一遍，我个人表示乐观。但还是觉得应该等等看，还没到庆贺的时候。

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

'The
provision deals with undecided applications .and does not provide for nullification of lawfully
rendered decisions of visa officers. Parliament would have had to expressly provide for such a
result in the amended legislation.


再来看Justice Blanchard的这句话，又道出了87.4的一个漏洞：国会没有在87.4法律条款里明确说VO的decision也要被“一刀切”，87.4通篇指的是没有被VO decide的applications要被一刀切。

这个道理和TIM的pre614一样，87.4（2）虽然规定了329后的法庭判决无效，但没有明确规定部长和申请人签订的协议产生的vested rights也无效。

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

这样一个中间结果是否符合判决所指validly rendered visa officer's decision还需要经过律师的辩论和法官的最终认定。。

完全同意，如果律师不去努力辩论，到手的东西也要被拿走，一个眼前的例子已经发生了。。。

打官司就是逆水行舟不进则退，被动是肯定要失败的。。。

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

就是很关心Kurland律师最近什么进展。。。他看到这段判词应该很受启发啊。

这个ZHU案是去年6月起步的，RICHARD的起步晚了，所以还没有开庭做判决。如果那几个台湾人在去年6月就请了李克伦打官司，你们现在也有结果了。来马后炮一下。。。你们6月的时候就应该去请李克伦。

这个胜诉的ZHU案不会让李克伦的官司马上受益----毕竟那些法庭规定的繁琐的步骤要一步一步走，不过李克伦的无论如何两三个月内就要开庭判决了。

 

[Milky Monkey]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

A very valid argument!

Now key is there should be a lawyer who can help us to present this argument to the court!

'The
provision deals with undecided applications .and does not provide for nullification of lawfully
rendered decisions of visa officers. Parliament would have had to expressly provide for such a
result in the amended legislation.


再来看Justice Blanchard的这句话，又道出了87.4的一个漏洞：国会没有在87.4法律条款里明确说VO的decision也要被“一刀切”，87.4通篇指的是没有被VO decide的applications要被一刀切。

这个道理和TIM的pre614一样，87.4（2）虽然规定了329后的法庭判决无效，但没有明确规定部长和申请人签订的协议产生的vested rights也无效。

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

A very valid argument!

Now key is there should be a lawyer who can help us to present this argument to the court!

I'm sure Richard will present it to the court, he is the only one who specialize in your group's case....just take it easy.... it ain't necessary to hurry, hurry and hurry...

I'm also very sure there are tons of strong points in this written decision of Justice Blanchard which can be utilized by our lawyers.

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

More strong points:

What 87.4 expresses explicitly is those who hadn't had a positive selection decision before March 29 would be terminated, the only criteria is SELECTION DECISION, not final decision. And the winning case ZHU 's "decision", selection or final, was made after March 29.

Even though Justice Blanchard didn't define the meaning of "validly rendered visa officer's decision" is SD or DM, it's very clear the language of 87.4 doesn't say that a final decision or DM made after March 29 will be exempted, so it really doesn't matter what kind of decision it is.

If Zhu could be exempted from 87.4 just because his decision is "final", and ME group couldn't because their decisions are "selection", then what is the legal ground? After all, Zhu's selection decision was absolutely made after March 29.

So, the key point is: where is the legal ground that a post 329 DM case could be exempted?

 

[qlm001]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

都是瞎折腾

 

[Milky Monkey]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

都是瞎折腾

I guess coming here and typing the 5 word is even a bigger waste of your time. Do something with value to your own life if don't want to be a loser, standing at the sideline of others life is not gonna help you.

 

[Milky Monkey]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

This is exactly the opposite view of Tim's, that is why he also hoped his view was wrong.

More strong points:

What 87.4 expresses explicitly is those who hadn't had a positive selection decision before March 29 would be terminated, the only criteria is SELECTION DECISION, not final decision. And the winning case ZHU 's "decision", selection or final, was made after March 29.

Even though Justice Blanchard didn't define the meaning of "validly rendered visa officer's decision" is SD or DM, it's very clear the language of 87.4 doesn't say that a final decision or DM made after March 29 will be exempted, so it really doesn't matter what kind of decision it is.

If Zhu could be exempted from 87.4 just because his decision is "final", and ME group couldn't because their decisions are "selection", then what is the legal ground? After all, Zhu's selection decision was absolutely made after March 29.

So, the key point is: where is the legal ground that a post 329 DM case could be exempted?

 

[jack_yxj]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

这个胜诉的案子只对ME被切，以及TIM的pre614这两组有很强大的示范效应。这就是我大半年来不断强调的--------这两组案子不受87.4的影响！！！！

是不是可以得出这样的结论，我们PRE614 的未S2的也有希望了。

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

今晚我已经给Richard去了一封信了. 半夜会有回复.

I received a reply from Richard, he thanked for my information.

 

[GreatManWR]

回复: ME被切的同学们，重新拿到签证的希望现在几乎是看得见摸得

从道义上来讲, 只要接受了人家的申请...发放了FN... 申请人在眼巴巴一年等待，移民局一一审理完毕，这是一份责任 一份承诺...


如今舔着脸到法庭上去掰扯这些，移民局从哪儿都说不过去...


你加拿大标榜的国家精神以及价值观念呢... 归根结底加拿大真的从一刀切获益了么？






说句牢骚的:
最可悲的是大批的加拿大华人支持移民局的做法... 理由不过是这"有符合"加拿大利益... 而他们眼中现在他们的利益跟加拿大是同在的... 无疑这些晚一步"上船"的人瞬间成了眼中的利益冲突着...
俺讲不出什么大道理, 只是琢磨着... 这份支持心底真的就那么硬气？不打哆嗦么？