chanduv23
05-18 11:16 AM
I had another LUD on 05/18/2009 my I-485 case. Not sure what they are looking for in my file.
Those continuous LUDs are pre adjudication processes - means your name check status, other statuses. FP etc... are all processed.
Those continuous LUDs are pre adjudication processes - means your name check status, other statuses. FP etc... are all processed.
wallpaper World of Warcraft Wrath of the
sirinme
07-15 12:47 PM
Contributions for both self and spouse!
mohitb272
09-13 04:09 PM
You guys are awesome and it is because of people like you that I feel confident that the rally will be a SUCCESS! Alas, I wont be there since my FP date is the same. But I assure you that my contribution will not end here.
Best of luck guys!
Best of luck guys!
2011 World of Warcraft Wrath of the
chanduv23
11-26 10:29 AM
Thank you, I'll keep everyone posted if anything changes.
I called USCIS customer service to ask for the attorney name on file and they said that they didn't have access to that information and I would have to get an Infopass appointment for that. Given the crap that ChanduV had to deal with (for changing jobs on AC21) during his infopass appointment, it is probably best I just wait to ask that question until my second biometric appointment is due in a few months.
Thanks,
Well - not every officer will deal with you in the same manner. It was my bad luck. I am sure, I might find someone helpful if I go again. So don't get intimidated and discouraged.
Usually at infopass they do not want to answer questions like 'Who is my Attorney on file etc... " The questions they answer are - name check pending, further review etc..... So you may get an answer "If your Attorney has filed for G 28 - then you don't have to worry". But you never know and can always give a try.
I called USCIS customer service to ask for the attorney name on file and they said that they didn't have access to that information and I would have to get an Infopass appointment for that. Given the crap that ChanduV had to deal with (for changing jobs on AC21) during his infopass appointment, it is probably best I just wait to ask that question until my second biometric appointment is due in a few months.
Thanks,
Well - not every officer will deal with you in the same manner. It was my bad luck. I am sure, I might find someone helpful if I go again. So don't get intimidated and discouraged.
Usually at infopass they do not want to answer questions like 'Who is my Attorney on file etc... " The questions they answer are - name check pending, further review etc..... So you may get an answer "If your Attorney has filed for G 28 - then you don't have to worry". But you never know and can always give a try.
more...
qualified_trash
01-03 04:16 PM
I think you bring up very valid points. For a lot of ppl who have stayed away from family/extended family for so long, they may not like the constant interference.
"I miss my parents" is not quantifiable but what about the paying back the debt by supporting your aging parents? Let me make the question a little broader, isn't every immigrant divided between doing what's best for the children and supporting the parents?
yes they are indeed. I took care of this as my sisters and parents have immigrated to New Zealand, work and live happily there and will be covered by a great social security system.
also, they do not need a visa to visit me after they get their citizenship (in the next year or so) and I will not need one to visit them after I get mine in the next decade or so.......... :-))
as for what is best, we should all ask our parents and they would say do whats best for your kid because that is what they did. they did their best for us and we should do the best for our kids as they should do their best for theirs........
"I miss my parents" is not quantifiable but what about the paying back the debt by supporting your aging parents? Let me make the question a little broader, isn't every immigrant divided between doing what's best for the children and supporting the parents?
yes they are indeed. I took care of this as my sisters and parents have immigrated to New Zealand, work and live happily there and will be covered by a great social security system.
also, they do not need a visa to visit me after they get their citizenship (in the next year or so) and I will not need one to visit them after I get mine in the next decade or so.......... :-))
as for what is best, we should all ask our parents and they would say do whats best for your kid because that is what they did. they did their best for us and we should do the best for our kids as they should do their best for theirs........
chisinau
07-23 03:06 AM
You are welcome!
I am not sure about DS230, my attorney did it around 27 - 29 of June.
I am not sure about DS230, my attorney did it around 27 - 29 of June.
more...
matreen
10-17 01:58 AM
Guys,
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
2010 /Lichen planus gums stem
red200
12-11 04:47 PM
Folks,
IV is working to address issues that affect us now/sooner or later, please contribute as and when possible without waiting for any specific agenda to be picked up.
Help IV to help you
Thanks to IV for that ..
But the word "later" seems to be very distant, not just for us. but for the dependents too
I believe this is administrative fix at least pre filing . This is more acheivable
IV is working to address issues that affect us now/sooner or later, please contribute as and when possible without waiting for any specific agenda to be picked up.
Help IV to help you
Thanks to IV for that ..
But the word "later" seems to be very distant, not just for us. but for the dependents too
I believe this is administrative fix at least pre filing . This is more acheivable
more...
langagadu
09-15 11:01 AM
Whay are you jealous of people who are porting? Why can't people go from EB3-EB2?
This is different from the Labour substituation, if a person filed in EB-3 in 2001and gained 7 years of experience, if the company is promoting him to the next higher position, it is very much acceptable for USCIS to promote his EB-3to EB-2.
I don't think USCIS will not give any shit to anything you are trying.
Once you have approved I-140, that date is your's buddy. Jealousy suckers.
So what you are saying is, everytime you apply for a I-140, all your previous I-140's should be dropped. Is that you want. Do you realize they can not do this as an Admin fix?
So basically you want to get Green card and be happy and everybody else should die in the f***** queue.
WHY DON'T YOU USE THIS F****** ENERGY FOR SUPPORTING (EMAILS, CALLS TO THE SENETAORS) THE RE CAPTURE BILLS.
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
This is different from the Labour substituation, if a person filed in EB-3 in 2001and gained 7 years of experience, if the company is promoting him to the next higher position, it is very much acceptable for USCIS to promote his EB-3to EB-2.
I don't think USCIS will not give any shit to anything you are trying.
Once you have approved I-140, that date is your's buddy. Jealousy suckers.
So what you are saying is, everytime you apply for a I-140, all your previous I-140's should be dropped. Is that you want. Do you realize they can not do this as an Admin fix?
So basically you want to get Green card and be happy and everybody else should die in the f***** queue.
WHY DON'T YOU USE THIS F****** ENERGY FOR SUPPORTING (EMAILS, CALLS TO THE SENETAORS) THE RE CAPTURE BILLS.
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
hair WOW Wrath of the Lich King PHP
Legal
07-05 12:42 PM
I called the congresswomen and senator from our constituencies. They do not have any idea what I am talking about. I think I made them more confused than ever.
We need to come up with a letter format, which can be printed and send it to them by mail as well as we need to have web fax with a clear message.
Dear Senator,
I am an immigrant who entered this country legally. I�ve been waiting for my US permanent resident visa -also known as green card for the past several years along with 500,000 other educated, highly skilled employment based (EB) immigrants. Many of us have been waiting for our turn to get the green card for 5-10 years while consistently abiding by all the laws of this country. Such long delays are due to tortuous and confusing paper work, back logs due to various quotas and processing delays at US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS).
Several categories of EB immigrant visa numbers have been unavailable (�retrogressed�) since the fall of 2005. Because our immigrant petitions are tied to the sponsoring employer, for many of us these delays have led to indentured servitude. Our professional prospects, job mobility and potential opportunities for entrepreneurship have been shattered.
For the past several decades, the US Department of State (DOS) has been publishing advisories known as visa bulletins once a month to announce the availability of immigrant .visa numbers. On June 13, 2007, after a gap of nearly two years, DOS announced that all EB visa numbers would be �current� for the month of July. This meant, irrespective of our �priority date�, all of us were made eligible to apply for some interim immigration benefits. This �priority date� refers to the date when our labor certification (documentation verifying no US citizen worker was available for a given job) had been filed.
This announcement by DOS on 6/13/2007 would not have led to immediate green card for most of us; but at least it would have ensured us interim benefits such as job mobility, some freedom from the employer, work authorization for our spouses and a travel authorization known as �advance parole�. This authorization would allow us to travel outside US without fear of not being able to re-enter the country.
We spent thousands of dollars in legal fees, immigration medical exams, vaccinations, blood tests, x-rays and getting various supporting documents ready to file our immigrant petitions to USCIS. It has been an agonizing two weeks for us. Some of us to had to fly in our spouses from our native countries. To our shock and dismay, on the morning of July 2nd 2007, USCIS announced that EB visa numbers were not available and all our petitions would be rejected. Within a span of 2 weeks, to be precise -in 12 working days- USCIS claims to have approved 60,000 EB immigrant visa petitions. This unprecedented rapid action of USCIS has led to exhaustion of all the available visa numbers for this fiscal year. Meanwhile it is prognosticated that in the next fiscal year which begins on October 1, 2007 our plight and delays would actually worsen.
Interestingly USCIS has never processed so many applications this fast, and it is unclear why they did not convey this potential exhaustion of visa numbers to DOS before June 13, 2007.
For the legal skilled immigrants this has been a rather traumatizing and disheartening experience.
We sincerely seek immediate congressional/ legislative remedial measures which would
(1) Reduce the enormous backlogs of green card petitions of legal skilled immigrants
(2) Ensure and enable USCIS not to reject our immigrant visa petitions and give us interim benefits of a pending immigrant visa petition.
I make this sincere request on behalf of all legal skilled immigrants with the hope that people who played by the rules will be rewarded.
Yours Sincerely,
We need to come up with a letter format, which can be printed and send it to them by mail as well as we need to have web fax with a clear message.
Dear Senator,
I am an immigrant who entered this country legally. I�ve been waiting for my US permanent resident visa -also known as green card for the past several years along with 500,000 other educated, highly skilled employment based (EB) immigrants. Many of us have been waiting for our turn to get the green card for 5-10 years while consistently abiding by all the laws of this country. Such long delays are due to tortuous and confusing paper work, back logs due to various quotas and processing delays at US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS).
Several categories of EB immigrant visa numbers have been unavailable (�retrogressed�) since the fall of 2005. Because our immigrant petitions are tied to the sponsoring employer, for many of us these delays have led to indentured servitude. Our professional prospects, job mobility and potential opportunities for entrepreneurship have been shattered.
For the past several decades, the US Department of State (DOS) has been publishing advisories known as visa bulletins once a month to announce the availability of immigrant .visa numbers. On June 13, 2007, after a gap of nearly two years, DOS announced that all EB visa numbers would be �current� for the month of July. This meant, irrespective of our �priority date�, all of us were made eligible to apply for some interim immigration benefits. This �priority date� refers to the date when our labor certification (documentation verifying no US citizen worker was available for a given job) had been filed.
This announcement by DOS on 6/13/2007 would not have led to immediate green card for most of us; but at least it would have ensured us interim benefits such as job mobility, some freedom from the employer, work authorization for our spouses and a travel authorization known as �advance parole�. This authorization would allow us to travel outside US without fear of not being able to re-enter the country.
We spent thousands of dollars in legal fees, immigration medical exams, vaccinations, blood tests, x-rays and getting various supporting documents ready to file our immigrant petitions to USCIS. It has been an agonizing two weeks for us. Some of us to had to fly in our spouses from our native countries. To our shock and dismay, on the morning of July 2nd 2007, USCIS announced that EB visa numbers were not available and all our petitions would be rejected. Within a span of 2 weeks, to be precise -in 12 working days- USCIS claims to have approved 60,000 EB immigrant visa petitions. This unprecedented rapid action of USCIS has led to exhaustion of all the available visa numbers for this fiscal year. Meanwhile it is prognosticated that in the next fiscal year which begins on October 1, 2007 our plight and delays would actually worsen.
Interestingly USCIS has never processed so many applications this fast, and it is unclear why they did not convey this potential exhaustion of visa numbers to DOS before June 13, 2007.
For the legal skilled immigrants this has been a rather traumatizing and disheartening experience.
We sincerely seek immediate congressional/ legislative remedial measures which would
(1) Reduce the enormous backlogs of green card petitions of legal skilled immigrants
(2) Ensure and enable USCIS not to reject our immigrant visa petitions and give us interim benefits of a pending immigrant visa petition.
I make this sincere request on behalf of all legal skilled immigrants with the hope that people who played by the rules will be rewarded.
Yours Sincerely,
more...
mallu
03-31 11:42 PM
Alright Guys, Let's ignore this Dard-e-disco guy he doesn't deserve a second of our time. To answer your question, one thing atleast USCIS can give us is, Release data like How many applications they have already received from Major Green Card Seeking countries and in which EB categories. All this data they would have entered in their computers, They can easily run these kind of reports, I'm sure they'll be having some Data Warehousing softwares. So atleast everybody of know where we stand today and stop predicting cut-off dates etc. etc.
They can also make sure they send our APs and EADs in less than 90 days....
As Ron Gotcher observed, they are still using DOS ( not department of state ! ) programs .
They can also make sure they send our APs and EADs in less than 90 days....
As Ron Gotcher observed, they are still using DOS ( not department of state ! ) programs .
hot Bajar World Of Warcraft
supplychainwalla
05-02 09:43 AM
Why is there so much discussion surrounding this stimulus package, I thought all of were highly skilled, high educated clique who made the big $$.
I have seen numerous occasions where people boast of large pay packets, bill rates, and now this is a measly $1,200, an amount that could be made with working 2 days is generating such a huge discussion. This does not add up???
I have seen numerous occasions where people boast of large pay packets, bill rates, and now this is a measly $1,200, an amount that could be made with working 2 days is generating such a huge discussion. This does not add up???
more...
house world of warcraft wrath of the
Green.Tech
06-19 10:11 AM
Contributions have been trickling everyday. 1 or 2 contributors per day for an organization that has 30,000 members.
Come on folks, get inspired and contribute!
Still looking for HEROES to get us to $20k.
Come on folks, get inspired and contribute!
Still looking for HEROES to get us to $20k.
tattoo World Of Warcraft Wrath Of The
fromnaija
06-01 05:02 PM
All this is speculative. Nothing is firm until this becomes law. Nobody knows what the final version will be as there are tons of amendments trailing this bill.
The current form of the bill states that only those with approved I-140 as of date of introduction will be processed under existing laws. Those with approved LC who filed 140 after the introduction date will have to re-apply under the merit based system.
I have a question here. If this bill becomes law in its current form what happens to those I-140 filed on May 15, 2007 itself. Can they saty in old system or they have to go to the new system ? I looked into AILA interpretation but its not clear about those are filed on May 15, 2007 itself.
The current form of the bill states that only those with approved I-140 as of date of introduction will be processed under existing laws. Those with approved LC who filed 140 after the introduction date will have to re-apply under the merit based system.
I have a question here. If this bill becomes law in its current form what happens to those I-140 filed on May 15, 2007 itself. Can they saty in old system or they have to go to the new system ? I looked into AILA interpretation but its not clear about those are filed on May 15, 2007 itself.
more...
pictures World of WarCraft: Wrath of
PHANI_TAVVALA
09-01 01:47 PM
Been here since August 1995 - came on F1 undergrad
and counting. Looks like you were out of luck. You would have been an citizen if you started your greencard pre-1999.
and counting. Looks like you were out of luck. You would have been an citizen if you started your greencard pre-1999.
dresses Wrath of the Lich King
ras
07-05 09:26 PM
I think this is a valid question that is being asked and should be answered by IV core. Am always intrigued by our behind the scenes effort and the heck that is going on. I do not want to cross the line and judge the integrity on IV core, but would really like to know exactly what we are up to. At least we need to periodic conf calls and announcement of our efforts (and I understand there needs to be some secrecy with anti-immig watching us closely).
Though IV core has been doing a great job, with the huge member base is it really leveraging the member potential except for donations and stories? May be there should be a change in the strategy leveraging the members thoughts and putting things in perspective. Chances are a few new team members could bring new energy and strategies.
Though IV core has been doing a great job, with the huge member base is it really leveraging the member potential except for donations and stories? May be there should be a change in the strategy leveraging the members thoughts and putting things in perspective. Chances are a few new team members could bring new energy and strategies.
more...
makeup The Wrath of the Lich King
Canadian_Dream
06-02 08:18 PM
You are correct, it only uses I-140 application as a basis of setting the cut-off (Not I-485).
In my opinion:
Date of Introduction: May 15 2007
Effective Date: Oct 01 2008
Scenarios:
Scenario 1: I-140 Filed after Introduction and Approved before effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 2: I-140 Filed after Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases have to refile.
Scenario 3: I-140 Filed before Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 4: I-140 not filed becasue of backlogged labor. They retain the priority date but have to restart in the new system, whatever that means.
Only bad scenario is 2 and 4. The other bad aspect is reduced supply of immigrant visa 90,000.
Hey Canadian Dream:
I know things might change , i wish this law doesnt pass through at all. But in its form this is interpretation of major members and attorneys in current stage. Please correct me if i am wrong.
I might agree with your conclusion of start date, but Now coming to to cases :
Petetion for an employment based visa = I 140 , that were filed prior to the date of intro ( for our sake its Oct 2008 or May 15 2007 ) that were pending or approved , shall be treated as if such provision remained effective.
An approved petition may server as basis for issuance of an immigrant visa.
and for all people who are still in Labor stage will preserve their priority date.
Now based on this , if you have filed an I140 before the date of enactment what ever it might one should be fine. Once dates becomes current and I140 approved one can file for 485 in previous system.
I dont see any conclusion based on 485 is approved or not its just adjustment of status once PD become current , i think its all 140 that determines you are approved as an immigrant or not.
===========================
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
In my opinion:
Date of Introduction: May 15 2007
Effective Date: Oct 01 2008
Scenarios:
Scenario 1: I-140 Filed after Introduction and Approved before effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 2: I-140 Filed after Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases have to refile.
Scenario 3: I-140 Filed before Introduction and not approved on the effective date. These cases are eligible for Immigrant Visa, whenever available.
Scenario 4: I-140 not filed becasue of backlogged labor. They retain the priority date but have to restart in the new system, whatever that means.
Only bad scenario is 2 and 4. The other bad aspect is reduced supply of immigrant visa 90,000.
Hey Canadian Dream:
I know things might change , i wish this law doesnt pass through at all. But in its form this is interpretation of major members and attorneys in current stage. Please correct me if i am wrong.
I might agree with your conclusion of start date, but Now coming to to cases :
Petetion for an employment based visa = I 140 , that were filed prior to the date of intro ( for our sake its Oct 2008 or May 15 2007 ) that were pending or approved , shall be treated as if such provision remained effective.
An approved petition may server as basis for issuance of an immigrant visa.
and for all people who are still in Labor stage will preserve their priority date.
Now based on this , if you have filed an I140 before the date of enactment what ever it might one should be fine. Once dates becomes current and I140 approved one can file for 485 in previous system.
I dont see any conclusion based on 485 is approved or not its just adjustment of status once PD become current , i think its all 140 that determines you are approved as an immigrant or not.
===========================
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
girlfriend Wrath of the Lich King
saimrathi
07-05 03:14 PM
Very good news.. Keep it up.. I have done my share of calling/writing to the Representatives...
I just spoke with an Immigration Representative of my Senator. She knows me as I met her last year with my employer for my other issue.
She just informed me that we are (Not only we but whole Congress) shocked with un-precedent action of DOS/USCIS for July VB. Senator's Washington DC office is working on this issue including immediate legislative relief to Employment Based immigration. She is well aware of whole drama of July VB. I am going to call Washington DC Office as well.
I encourage every one call to their Senator and HR and speak with Immigration Representative. I think first time media and lawmakers have acknowledged the problem of Employment Based Immigration.
Call make much impact than the email/fax
I just spoke with an Immigration Representative of my Senator. She knows me as I met her last year with my employer for my other issue.
She just informed me that we are (Not only we but whole Congress) shocked with un-precedent action of DOS/USCIS for July VB. Senator's Washington DC office is working on this issue including immediate legislative relief to Employment Based immigration. She is well aware of whole drama of July VB. I am going to call Washington DC Office as well.
I encourage every one call to their Senator and HR and speak with Immigration Representative. I think first time media and lawmakers have acknowledged the problem of Employment Based Immigration.
Call make much impact than the email/fax
hairstyles World of Warcraft Wrath of the Lich King Images World of Warcraft Wrath of
jk333
07-23 01:47 PM
Just sharing so that this encorages more participation..
Our company fund drive is at 12500$ (in 4 days).. We're trying to hit 15K
by Wednesday, which I hope we'll be able to race past.
Any other company wants to challenge our Drive? :)
Hi guys,
I am sure every company would have their own 'stuck in gc process' alias.
Please start an IV fund drive, so that you can do this on a company basis.
Theres one going on in mine..and guess what..20 contributions in a couple of hours.
Our company fund drive is at 12500$ (in 4 days).. We're trying to hit 15K
by Wednesday, which I hope we'll be able to race past.
Any other company wants to challenge our Drive? :)
Hi guys,
I am sure every company would have their own 'stuck in gc process' alias.
Please start an IV fund drive, so that you can do this on a company basis.
Theres one going on in mine..and guess what..20 contributions in a couple of hours.
paisa
07-06 03:25 PM
can someone tell me who is core? I hear core mentioned all the time here
jayleno
10-17 03:20 PM
Under the authority of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the CIS Ombudsman assists individuals and employers who experience specific problems during the USCIS benefits seeking process, largely to identify problems and to formulate recommendations to improve the USCIS service. Please see our website for more information about the CIS Ombudsman (www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman/).
Our office believes that first hand information from individuals like you is the best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration benefits process. Accordingly, our office will consider the information you provided regarding AC21 as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS’ practices and procedures.
Thank you for taking the time to contact our office, and for giving us the opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
Our office believes that first hand information from individuals like you is the best source for identifying systemic problems in the immigration benefits process. Accordingly, our office will consider the information you provided regarding AC21 as we develop recommendations to improve USCIS’ practices and procedures.
Thank you for taking the time to contact our office, and for giving us the opportunity to serve you.
Sincerely,
CIS Ombudsman
No comments:
Post a Comment