National Paralegal Inst. Coalition - Page 6

          2002.  Petitioner was provided a 30-day response period, at the               
          expiration of which its application would be administratively                 
          closed and a new user fee would be charged to resume processing.              
          Petitioner denies that it received the disputed letter.                       
               On August 31, 2004, petitioner sent a letter of protest to               
          respondent (the August 31, 2004, letter) concerning the status of             
          its application and requesting Appeals Office consideration.  In              
          the August 31, 2004, letter, petitioner supplied additional                   
          information corresponding in substance to, and following the                  
          sequence and arrangement of, the enumerated inadequacies detailed             
          in the disputed letter.  The August 31, 2004, letter does not                 
          expressly reference the disputed letter, nor does it contain                  
          identical numbering, but its particular content and organization              
          reflect the fact that it was intended as a response to the                    
          disputed letter.  For example, item 21 of the disputed letter                 
          requires that petitioner provide a copy of a presentation                     
          entitled:  “Alleviating Recidivism Among Prisoners:  China and                
          Texas.”  In comparison, item 19 of the August 31, 2004, letter                
          states:  “the Presentation is called: ‘Alleviating Recidivism                 
          among Prisoners’, where China as well as Texas Exploits its                   
          Prisoner’s Labor.  (The question was presented wrong in the                   
          request for additional information.)”                                         
               Following correspondence from petitioner dated October 4,                
          2004, regarding the status of its preceding administrative                    

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011