masouds
02-15 05:09 PM
US government thinks that Indians and Chinese don't mix up with other races. Are u on drugs ??????????????????:mad:
Look, I don't want to enter a pissing match with anyone here. Go read your history (http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses) before jumping to conclusions.
Look, I don't want to enter a pissing match with anyone here. Go read your history (http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses) before jumping to conclusions.
wallpaper Alessandra Ambrosio
frostrated
09-09 04:20 PM
I have read so many posts in the past where senior members have clearly said that their is nothing possible for EB3 alone and if something is possible it would be for EB.
(as per calculator, I am going to get my GC in 2030) Would contribution of all EB3 help them in any way?
Contributing money will not help, but contributing time and effort will go a long way in alleviating the pain that IV members are going through.
Make it a point to talk to the senators and representatives. They will have meet and greets every now and then. Go to those meetings. Set up appointments with them. Educate them.
If not, there is not going to be any CIR, and all the money that you send to IV will be a donation to IV, and that is all it is to it.
(as per calculator, I am going to get my GC in 2030) Would contribution of all EB3 help them in any way?
Contributing money will not help, but contributing time and effort will go a long way in alleviating the pain that IV members are going through.
Make it a point to talk to the senators and representatives. They will have meet and greets every now and then. Go to those meetings. Set up appointments with them. Educate them.
If not, there is not going to be any CIR, and all the money that you send to IV will be a donation to IV, and that is all it is to it.
go_gc_way
12-28 07:19 AM
Bump /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
2011 VS model Alessandra Ambrosio
nojoke
10-20 11:55 AM
He doesn't compare with Mccain on any of the issues except being able to talk. He spends more money running negative ads than Mccain. Then he says, john, 100% of your ads are negative where as only 50% of mine are negative. Which is true but if you dig further Mccain is spending 1bout 50Mil on negative ads where as Obama is spending 80Mil. Though he is correct in his percentages statement,is he really correct?
Any time any question is raised , call them slimy is another strategy of Obama. He did it with Clintons and he is doing with Mccain.
Give me an ad like "he is palling around with ...". Or "he is teaching sex for babies..." or..
I can go on. Obama has highlighted healthcare policy differences. That is not negative ad. The only negative ad I have seen is " he is erratic.."
Any time any question is raised , call them slimy is another strategy of Obama. He did it with Clintons and he is doing with Mccain.
Give me an ad like "he is palling around with ...". Or "he is teaching sex for babies..." or..
I can go on. Obama has highlighted healthcare policy differences. That is not negative ad. The only negative ad I have seen is " he is erratic.."
more...
vijayassr
02-23 02:24 AM
Hi,
Have a question on my visa.
I applied for H1 visa with company A, when I am in US in Apr'08 with
L1 thats getting expired, due to emergency I went to India.
I got h1 approval notice with COS on July'23 2008.
My Indian company B asked to get fresh L1 , so I took a stamping on
Aug'20 2008 and came to US on L1
changed company A with H1 visa . (company A did not do any COS again, since they say H1 is already with COS).
Want to know if my H1 is valid do I need to do any other things to
tell USCIS that I am on H1 NOW. Can I do stamping at Mexico/Cuba.
If there is any problem above how to come out of it.
Have a question on my visa.
I applied for H1 visa with company A, when I am in US in Apr'08 with
L1 thats getting expired, due to emergency I went to India.
I got h1 approval notice with COS on July'23 2008.
My Indian company B asked to get fresh L1 , so I took a stamping on
Aug'20 2008 and came to US on L1
changed company A with H1 visa . (company A did not do any COS again, since they say H1 is already with COS).
Want to know if my H1 is valid do I need to do any other things to
tell USCIS that I am on H1 NOW. Can I do stamping at Mexico/Cuba.
If there is any problem above how to come out of it.
ashwaghoshk
03-21 12:39 PM
I still dont see labor approvals after March1. I dont know where you r looking at,, Can you tell me which page your looking at?
I sent you a private message... check that url
I sent you a private message... check that url
more...
kaisersose
09-18 11:15 PM
I had to reluctantly stay away from the rally due to a brand new baby at home, but I sure hope to be part of future efforts.
And I totally agree that Legal is the keyword. Most Americans are not clear about Legals v Illegals and lump them together. Of course, some just do not care and do not see a need to differentiate between the two. They would just like to see Asian and South Asian folks get out of the country.
And I also am not in favor of asking for an increase in GC quota. Instead I am in favor of not counting spouse and kids against the quota. This itself will effectively inrease the quota to over 350K per year. Directly asking for quota increase always leaves a bad taste for skeptics and will slow down any possible action.
And I totally agree that Legal is the keyword. Most Americans are not clear about Legals v Illegals and lump them together. Of course, some just do not care and do not see a need to differentiate between the two. They would just like to see Asian and South Asian folks get out of the country.
And I also am not in favor of asking for an increase in GC quota. Instead I am in favor of not counting spouse and kids against the quota. This itself will effectively inrease the quota to over 350K per year. Directly asking for quota increase always leaves a bad taste for skeptics and will slow down any possible action.
2010 Model Alessandra Ambrosio
gclabor07
10-19 09:31 PM
Folks,
I was just looking at the Obama and McCain websites just to see how they look from design standpoint (I'm a UI designer by profession). I happened to read their views on Immigration. I was surprised to see that Obama's views were extremely vague and offered no solutions to retain or encourage highly skilled immigrant workers. McCain on the other hand has section on highly skilled immigrant workers and talks about retaining them after US education, H1B cap reform, greencard increase to reflect demand etc.
If you are curious, see for yourself.
Obama on Immigration:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/immigration/
McCain on Immigration:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/68db8157-d301-4e22-baf7-a70dd8416efa.htm
Not that any of us are allowed to vote or our opinions matter to these politicians, I thought this presents an interesting comparison.
Thx.
I was just looking at the Obama and McCain websites just to see how they look from design standpoint (I'm a UI designer by profession). I happened to read their views on Immigration. I was surprised to see that Obama's views were extremely vague and offered no solutions to retain or encourage highly skilled immigrant workers. McCain on the other hand has section on highly skilled immigrant workers and talks about retaining them after US education, H1B cap reform, greencard increase to reflect demand etc.
If you are curious, see for yourself.
Obama on Immigration:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/immigration/
McCain on Immigration:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/68db8157-d301-4e22-baf7-a70dd8416efa.htm
Not that any of us are allowed to vote or our opinions matter to these politicians, I thought this presents an interesting comparison.
Thx.
more...
anjs
10-25 11:36 AM
My PD is Febraury 2004
anjs
anjs
hair Alessandra Ambrosio Hair
Canadian_Dream
12-11 02:43 PM
Since this has always been pushed through legilative means (S.1932), there might be a hurdle involved in using "Rulemaking" approach to this solution, nevertheless this idea should atleast be explored. Here is how rulemaking procedures work in Govt Agency: (Adding Flexibility is something that can be done through Rulemaking).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rulemaking
Adding flexibility. More detailed regulations allow for more nuanced approaches to various conditions than a single legislative standard could. Moreover, regulations tend to be more easily changed as new data or technologies emerge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rulemaking
Adding flexibility. More detailed regulations allow for more nuanced approaches to various conditions than a single legislative standard could. Moreover, regulations tend to be more easily changed as new data or technologies emerge.
more...
EB3_SEP04
05-26 06:41 PM
I haven't heard anything like this (yes random checks I seen by cops in NJ) but not searching all cars on a highway and then verifying if everyone is legal and harassing them if they have not carried their immigration papers.
I read long ago after 9/11 that law enforcements used this tactic to jail folks who were suspected terrorists but if they are using this to discourage immigration (legal immigrants) it would be a real shame.
where are these commands coming from its not like one county suddenly gets up and starts doing random inspection, their must be a higher authority who is making these rules
I think the law/rule was passed/enacted in late 2008 by prev govt to make some psychos happy. It is a big problem in AZ and CA where these people routinely get in the commercial buses and ask everyone's status. so ACLU posted signs in buses telling people their rights. see my OP.
I read long ago after 9/11 that law enforcements used this tactic to jail folks who were suspected terrorists but if they are using this to discourage immigration (legal immigrants) it would be a real shame.
where are these commands coming from its not like one county suddenly gets up and starts doing random inspection, their must be a higher authority who is making these rules
I think the law/rule was passed/enacted in late 2008 by prev govt to make some psychos happy. It is a big problem in AZ and CA where these people routinely get in the commercial buses and ask everyone's status. so ACLU posted signs in buses telling people their rights. see my OP.
hot alessandra ambrosio hair.
yasimk
06-20 05:26 PM
Hi,
I am planning to file EAD & AP on my own and separately from I-485.
Our company will incur the charge for processing I-485 for me and my spouse. But they won't incur the charge for filing EAD and AP. All the attorneys are charging hefty amount for filing EAD & AP. So I am thinking to file EAD & AP on my own and let company take care of my I-485.
So my questions are
1) Is it ok if I file EAD & AP separately from I-485?
Or should i wait till I-485 approval is received and then file EAD & AP.
The concern is because in #10 of I-765 form, there is a section that asks for Alien Registration Number (A-number) or I-94 Number.
2) Is it ok if the I-485 applications are sent by the company and EAD & AP are sent by me and both of these documents reach separately at INS?
Generally most of the applications will reach INS in one bundle. Because I am sure most of the applicants will file I-485/EAD/AP in one shot. But in my case, it will be 2 reaching INS in 2 separate bundles. So is it ok, in my case?
Please advise.
Regards
~~~~~Y
I am planning to file EAD & AP on my own and separately from I-485.
Our company will incur the charge for processing I-485 for me and my spouse. But they won't incur the charge for filing EAD and AP. All the attorneys are charging hefty amount for filing EAD & AP. So I am thinking to file EAD & AP on my own and let company take care of my I-485.
So my questions are
1) Is it ok if I file EAD & AP separately from I-485?
Or should i wait till I-485 approval is received and then file EAD & AP.
The concern is because in #10 of I-765 form, there is a section that asks for Alien Registration Number (A-number) or I-94 Number.
2) Is it ok if the I-485 applications are sent by the company and EAD & AP are sent by me and both of these documents reach separately at INS?
Generally most of the applications will reach INS in one bundle. Because I am sure most of the applicants will file I-485/EAD/AP in one shot. But in my case, it will be 2 reaching INS in 2 separate bundles. So is it ok, in my case?
Please advise.
Regards
~~~~~Y
more...
house Alessandra Ambrosio Hair
reno_john
06-18 03:55 PM
For people who want to file I-485 filing on their own. Since 485 filing requires only one document from the employer (Employer's letter saying you have the job and its the same job description), its possible to file 485 by oneself without additional help from lawyer or employer. This is a thread for that purpose. Even those who have the help and attention of a good lawyer can use this thread for guidance. This is the initial list of documents that are required for 485 filing and the optional EAD and AP filing. The fee structure is scheduled to change after July 30th. The fees listed below are applicable now thru July 29th.
I-485 DOCUMENT CHECKLIST
1. Payment Checks (USCIS Filing Fees $325.00 in favor of 'United States Citizenship and Immigration Service' OR 'USCIS').
Original fee plus $70.00 biometrics services fee if you are 14 years of age or older. If you are under 14 years of age, the fee is $225.00 with no biometric services fee. If you are 79 years of age or older, the fee is $325.00 with no biometrics services fee.
Fillable I-485 form:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
Application is sent to:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
2. Form G-28 one with each Application form. Dont need this if you are doing it on your own without the lawyer. If doing on your own, you can fill out G-28 for your spouse, if you are filling out the forms and doing paperwork for your spouse. G-28 shows that the applicant is being represented etc. If you and your spouse are both filling out your own forms and signing them then you may not need G-28 for anything.
3. Two Photographs per 1-485,1-131,1-765
4. Completed form 1-485 for Adjustment of Status
5. Completed Period of Stay form. Completed in chronological order starting with first entry into US, and all changes of status, extensions, exits and entries, down to your current status.
6. Evidence of Valid Nonimmigrant Status:
Copies of both sides of any and all 1-94 cards
Copies of all 1-797 approval notices
Copies of any and all I-20's (if applicable, both sides)
Copies of all IAP 66 forms
Copies of all PT Work Authorization Cards (if applicable)
Copies of All pages of passport - INCLUDING BLANK PAGES AND PLEASE DO NOT MAKE TWO SIDED COPIES; ONE COPY PER PAGE AND MAKE SURE THAT COPIES ARE LEGIBLE
COMPLETED FORM G-325A Biographic Sheet
I-693 form( Every civil surgeon mostly has this form)
Completed Form 1-693 Medical Examination (SEALED) along with copy of list of INS approved Civil Surgeons
Birth Certificates and Marriage Certificate COPIES and other evidence of birth/marriage. One marriage certificate needed per person
Employment Letter in Format
Original for employee, copy for all other
I-765/EAD DOCUMENT CHECKLIST (Optional)
Documents required for EAD/I-765 per person:
Completed Form I-765 (EAD):
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765.pdf
2 photos(full frontal)
USCIS filing fee - $180.00 check payable to 'United States Citizenship and Immigration Service' OR 'USCIS' with your SSN# and I-765 mentioned in the comments section of the check
Copy of past EAD card front/back sides
Copy of recent I-94 card (both sides)
Copy of visa page of passport in color
Copy of driver's license
Copy of I-485 receipt notice (if applicable)
Copy of I-140 approval notice
Copy of Marriage certificate (if applying for spouse)
I-131/Advance Parole DOCUMENT CHECKLIST (Optional)
Documents required for Advance parole/ I-131 per person:
Completed form I-131
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-131.pdf
2 photos (full frontal)
USCIS filing fee - $170.00 check payable to 'United States Citizenship and Immigration Service' OR 'USCIS' with your SSN# and I-131 mentioned in the comments section of the check
copy of EAD card front/back sides,
Copy of I-94 card,
Copy of visa page of passport in color,
Copy of driver's license,
Copy of I-485 receipt notice,
Copy of I-140 approval notice,
Copy of Marriage certificate,
Copy of birth certificate for children and a letter explaining the reason for travel
Signed statement requesting advance parole
I-485 DOCUMENT CHECKLIST
1. Payment Checks (USCIS Filing Fees $325.00 in favor of 'United States Citizenship and Immigration Service' OR 'USCIS').
Original fee plus $70.00 biometrics services fee if you are 14 years of age or older. If you are under 14 years of age, the fee is $225.00 with no biometric services fee. If you are 79 years of age or older, the fee is $325.00 with no biometrics services fee.
Fillable I-485 form:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
Application is sent to:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
2. Form G-28 one with each Application form. Dont need this if you are doing it on your own without the lawyer. If doing on your own, you can fill out G-28 for your spouse, if you are filling out the forms and doing paperwork for your spouse. G-28 shows that the applicant is being represented etc. If you and your spouse are both filling out your own forms and signing them then you may not need G-28 for anything.
3. Two Photographs per 1-485,1-131,1-765
4. Completed form 1-485 for Adjustment of Status
5. Completed Period of Stay form. Completed in chronological order starting with first entry into US, and all changes of status, extensions, exits and entries, down to your current status.
6. Evidence of Valid Nonimmigrant Status:
Copies of both sides of any and all 1-94 cards
Copies of all 1-797 approval notices
Copies of any and all I-20's (if applicable, both sides)
Copies of all IAP 66 forms
Copies of all PT Work Authorization Cards (if applicable)
Copies of All pages of passport - INCLUDING BLANK PAGES AND PLEASE DO NOT MAKE TWO SIDED COPIES; ONE COPY PER PAGE AND MAKE SURE THAT COPIES ARE LEGIBLE
COMPLETED FORM G-325A Biographic Sheet
I-693 form( Every civil surgeon mostly has this form)
Completed Form 1-693 Medical Examination (SEALED) along with copy of list of INS approved Civil Surgeons
Birth Certificates and Marriage Certificate COPIES and other evidence of birth/marriage. One marriage certificate needed per person
Employment Letter in Format
Original for employee, copy for all other
I-765/EAD DOCUMENT CHECKLIST (Optional)
Documents required for EAD/I-765 per person:
Completed Form I-765 (EAD):
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765.pdf
2 photos(full frontal)
USCIS filing fee - $180.00 check payable to 'United States Citizenship and Immigration Service' OR 'USCIS' with your SSN# and I-765 mentioned in the comments section of the check
Copy of past EAD card front/back sides
Copy of recent I-94 card (both sides)
Copy of visa page of passport in color
Copy of driver's license
Copy of I-485 receipt notice (if applicable)
Copy of I-140 approval notice
Copy of Marriage certificate (if applying for spouse)
I-131/Advance Parole DOCUMENT CHECKLIST (Optional)
Documents required for Advance parole/ I-131 per person:
Completed form I-131
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-131.pdf
2 photos (full frontal)
USCIS filing fee - $170.00 check payable to 'United States Citizenship and Immigration Service' OR 'USCIS' with your SSN# and I-131 mentioned in the comments section of the check
copy of EAD card front/back sides,
Copy of I-94 card,
Copy of visa page of passport in color,
Copy of driver's license,
Copy of I-485 receipt notice,
Copy of I-140 approval notice,
Copy of Marriage certificate,
Copy of birth certificate for children and a letter explaining the reason for travel
Signed statement requesting advance parole
tattoo green-tinged hair color to
moonrah
08-07 11:10 AM
how do I translate this to future EB date movements?
more...
pictures alessandra ambrosio dress
ajthakur
07-14 06:25 PM
I filed EAD renewal on May 28 2008.
Service Center: Nebraska
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
Service Center: Nebraska
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
dresses Alessandra Ambrosio
MDix
02-11 06:56 PM
Dude,
Calm down, PresidenO gave you good comment and you got carried away thinking that President Obama praise you. Just vent your frustration somewhere else.
PresidentO,
I saw your past comment and it seems like you have an Attitude problem.
If something your are not agree or disagree that's fine but there is now way to go this far.
Thanks so much for your kind words.
I don't blame readers who start making noise without basic verification. Most people have difficulty understanding the difference between cap and quota Or Permanent job vs W2 job.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
Calm down, PresidenO gave you good comment and you got carried away thinking that President Obama praise you. Just vent your frustration somewhere else.
PresidentO,
I saw your past comment and it seems like you have an Attitude problem.
If something your are not agree or disagree that's fine but there is now way to go this far.
Thanks so much for your kind words.
I don't blame readers who start making noise without basic verification. Most people have difficulty understanding the difference between cap and quota Or Permanent job vs W2 job.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
makeup alessandra ambrosio
srini1976
07-11 09:12 PM
I consider this movement of dates a ticket to enter a lucky draw. Whatever visa numbers remain to be used in last two months of the fiscal year is going to be allocated at random to people who have their PD current in this period. So, congratulations to whoever gets lucky.
Well, your luck might be influenced by a variety of reasons like when you sent your application, whether your 140 is already approved, is it a complicated case, pending RFEs, etc. Nevertheless, it still is good news that so many people are now eligible to participate in the draw...
You are absolutely right dude :)
All (whose PD will be current) the Eb2 India folks try your luckkkkkkkkkkkkk..
Well, your luck might be influenced by a variety of reasons like when you sent your application, whether your 140 is already approved, is it a complicated case, pending RFEs, etc. Nevertheless, it still is good news that so many people are now eligible to participate in the draw...
You are absolutely right dude :)
All (whose PD will be current) the Eb2 India folks try your luckkkkkkkkkkkkk..
girlfriend alessandra ambrosio hairstyles
perm2gc
01-10 06:11 PM
https://www.visapro.com/Message-Board/showthread.php?p=62321#post62321
hairstyles alessandra ambrosio wallpapers
nixstor
07-04 08:56 PM
Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
amsgc
03-16 04:51 PM
It is good to see a sensible post in a long time.
Last Nov. I had gone for my biometrics and met this Chinese guy whose EB2 PD was somewhere in Jun 06 (EB2 China at the time was Jan 06). He was very confident that he will be current in a few months, and just rejected my efforts to recruit him (for IV). Well, it is now a few months later and the EB2 China PD is Dec 03. Unfortunately, because of the arbitrary movement in the visa bulletin, many people seem to think that their PD will be current soon. The truth of the matter is that the number of people in line (w/ or w/o labor sub, pd porting etc) is just very large. So, even if your PD becomes current, there is a slim chance that it will be adjudicated, and you will get the visa number assigned to your case, before the dates fall back again. Only a handful of very lucky people will get the GC, but for the majority, the frustration will continue.
The only way is to lobby congress for increasing the 140k cap. If they are not willing, then recapture numbers, exempt dependents etc. If even that is not acceptable this year then atleast lobby for admin fixes in the IV agenda - such as 3 yr. ead/ap, ability to file when PD is not current, and relax the AC21 rule further regarding proof of a valid job offer at the time of adjudication.
most people who filed LC in 2004/2005 before PERM got approvals in 2006 and 2007 and have only got a chance to apply for 485 in July VB. There are 10s of thousands of such people with that LC and EB2-India. When was the opportunity to get approval?
without an administrative fix, and with the current levels of demand and supply I would say its NIL. It needs to be a mistake...
Also, with H1 quota possibly going up this year or next, expect even more demand, and the dates will probably not be current for atleast a decade. The demand is going to go up (more H1s filing for greencards) and supply remaining the same (140k + country-limits etc)
Last Nov. I had gone for my biometrics and met this Chinese guy whose EB2 PD was somewhere in Jun 06 (EB2 China at the time was Jan 06). He was very confident that he will be current in a few months, and just rejected my efforts to recruit him (for IV). Well, it is now a few months later and the EB2 China PD is Dec 03. Unfortunately, because of the arbitrary movement in the visa bulletin, many people seem to think that their PD will be current soon. The truth of the matter is that the number of people in line (w/ or w/o labor sub, pd porting etc) is just very large. So, even if your PD becomes current, there is a slim chance that it will be adjudicated, and you will get the visa number assigned to your case, before the dates fall back again. Only a handful of very lucky people will get the GC, but for the majority, the frustration will continue.
The only way is to lobby congress for increasing the 140k cap. If they are not willing, then recapture numbers, exempt dependents etc. If even that is not acceptable this year then atleast lobby for admin fixes in the IV agenda - such as 3 yr. ead/ap, ability to file when PD is not current, and relax the AC21 rule further regarding proof of a valid job offer at the time of adjudication.
most people who filed LC in 2004/2005 before PERM got approvals in 2006 and 2007 and have only got a chance to apply for 485 in July VB. There are 10s of thousands of such people with that LC and EB2-India. When was the opportunity to get approval?
without an administrative fix, and with the current levels of demand and supply I would say its NIL. It needs to be a mistake...
Also, with H1 quota possibly going up this year or next, expect even more demand, and the dates will probably not be current for atleast a decade. The demand is going to go up (more H1s filing for greencards) and supply remaining the same (140k + country-limits etc)
stldude
07-13 08:21 AM
Guys ! ! ! ! AT this stage let's take all the help we get from any possible source. Although i agree that Murthy is trying to stab in to the fame/sucess in this fabulous effort by IV, but it's better to add on more Voices to this cause...
The whole GC Seekercommunity knows that IV played a very big role in creating a public awareness and making people talk. Let's not bother commenting on Murthy's evil intentions...
The whole GC Seekercommunity knows that IV played a very big role in creating a public awareness and making people talk. Let's not bother commenting on Murthy's evil intentions...
No comments:
Post a Comment