Zixiang Li, et al v. Hillary Clinton, et al

這是2010年5月遞交的訴訟，原因是2008年中國EB3隻發了2057，2009年更只發了1077，遠低於法定名額2803個。由於中國能獲得2803個名額的基礎就是「發綠卡必須按PD」（詳見 綠卡名額分配），所以，基於此法條，在2010年初，DOS公佈年度名額後，提起訴訟。訴訟結果是被法庭dismiss，上訴後再次被dismiss。

訴求

根據法庭文件 https://www.ilw.com/seminars/201005_citation3c.pdf，本次官司的訴求為：

A. 國務院違法，因為國務院沒有按照PD進行排期（即：沒有發滿中國，而卻發給了ROW，不滿足移民法關於「按照PD發卡」的要求）

B. 移民局違法，因為移民局沒有按照PD進行批准

C. 移民局違法，因為即使國務院沒有分配名額，移民局也沒有按照PD來批准

D. 被告人（國務院、移民局等）沒有按照法律要求，公佈PD的分佈情況

E. 被告人（國務院、移民局等）沒有按照法律要求，公佈 I-140 和 I-485 的庫存

訴求：被告人糾正錯誤，並且給原告預留名額。

判決

判決書 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca9-11-35412/pdf/USCOURTS-ca9-11-35412-0.pdf

針對「USCIS需要按PD批卡」：移民法寫的是，國務院要按照 PD 安排移民簽證，沒有說 USCIS 要怎樣，所以針對 USCIS 的指控不成立

針對「USCIS需要公開數據」：移民法對於 waitlist 的要求是，國務院需要發佈排期表。USCIS 沒有法定義務公開任何排期數據。

判卷詞原文：原告沒有找到相應的法律條文，我們也沒找到法律條文，說USCIS必須按PD批卡，或者公開待審核數據。Plaintiffs provide no authority, and we can locate none, suggesting that USCIS has a specific duty to maintain such an elaborate system for monitoring priority dates or the number of pending applications. Instead, USCIS's responsibilities are carefully circumscribed and tied to the actions of other agencies.

針對「預留名額」：移民法對於每年的名額規定是寫死的，法官無權要求增加。錯了就錯了，財年一過，就只有國會能重新立法修改數字了。原文：It does not matter whether administrative delays and errors are to blame for an alien not receiving a visa number on time. Once a visa number is gone, it cannot be recaptured absent an act of Congress.

針對「糾正錯誤」：法庭沒有時間機器，不能回到過去。Since courts are not time machines, we are unable to order DOS to go back in time and not do something it already did, let alone determine which individuals awarded visa numbers in the past should have their numbers taken away because they should have been awarded to Plaintiffs.

判決書里法官的意見

法官對於中國申請人表示同情，但法律就是這樣，他也沒有辦法。判決書 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ca9-11-35412/pdf/USCOURTS-ca9-11-35412-0.pdf

法官個人認為，USCIS沒有給DOS提供準確數據，是造成中國名額沒有發滿的原因之一，且中國人收到了實質性的傷害。

Nevertheless, without accurate information from USCIS regarding the number of pending applicants for EB-3 visas from each country, the Visa Office was unable—for at least two years, and likely for much longer—to ensure that the correct number of immigrant visas were made available to individuals from each country. Plaintiffs, and thousands of others like them, were prejudiced as a result, in that they were required to wait far longer for their visas than other individuals who applied at the same time.

錯誤的名額分配，雖然沒有違反某個具體的法定責任，但哪怕原告有更多一點責任心，都不會犯這種錯誤。如果DOS能夠向USCIS要數據，或者USCIS能夠提供給國務院數據，這種錯誤分配名額的事情，就可以避免。

The misallocation of visas that Plaintiffs complain of is not, however, the result of the violation of any specific duty, imposed on any specific defendant by Congress and identified as such in the Complaint. It appears, nevertheless, that the failure to effectuate the purpose of the statutory scheme could have been entirely avoided had the Defendants taken more seriously their joint responsibility to ensure the proper functioning of the immigrant visa system. Had the Visa Office simply asked USCIS for the necessary information regarding pending applications for immigrant visas—or, conversely, had USCIS simply provided to the Visa Office the full information that office required to create an accurate waiting list—the misallocation of visas that Plaintiffs complain of likely could have been averted.