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.
wallpaper Nature HD Wallpaper (click to
.jpg "free nature wallpaper computer")
srkamath
07-18 07:07 PM
My guess
Best case : 12 months
Worst care : 4 years
sachug22,
I agree with your initial post on this thread. In all likelihood, we will end up with ~ 50k - 55k, EB3s issued this fiscal.
Last year they issued ~ 6200 EB2-IN, and dates progressed one-year.
Considering the EB1 spillover plus the FB spillover, we will have ~ 15k - 20k available for EB2 In/CH for use in Aug/Sep08. If the USCIS does its job well, then that should be enough to propel EB2-IN dates forward by two-years April-04.
I believe a sizeable number of applicants with PD before Jun-06 will get their GCs approved before Sep-30-2008.
I know my case is stuck in background checks, hopefully it is past 180 days - i have no way of knowing.
I will be excessively anxious (like most others here) till Aug 1st week, if there is a deluge of approvals - good i'll probably get more anxious.
If there is only a trickle, i'll forget the whole Aug VB and go back to my plan-A (i.e. forget the GC and get on with living).
EB2-IN, PD Oct-28-2007
Best case : 12 months
Worst care : 4 years
sachug22,
I agree with your initial post on this thread. In all likelihood, we will end up with ~ 50k - 55k, EB3s issued this fiscal.
Last year they issued ~ 6200 EB2-IN, and dates progressed one-year.
Considering the EB1 spillover plus the FB spillover, we will have ~ 15k - 20k available for EB2 In/CH for use in Aug/Sep08. If the USCIS does its job well, then that should be enough to propel EB2-IN dates forward by two-years April-04.
I believe a sizeable number of applicants with PD before Jun-06 will get their GCs approved before Sep-30-2008.
I know my case is stuck in background checks, hopefully it is past 180 days - i have no way of knowing.
I will be excessively anxious (like most others here) till Aug 1st week, if there is a deluge of approvals - good i'll probably get more anxious.
If there is only a trickle, i'll forget the whole Aug VB and go back to my plan-A (i.e. forget the GC and get on with living).
EB2-IN, PD Oct-28-2007
Macaca
09-26 12:38 PM
Don't Drag India into everything!
Please, Have an open mind. Don't make statements like this.
IV has people from across the globe and each country has its own issues. We are trying to deal with the issues in the US and lets focus on that and not drag in other countries as examples (good or bad).
Thanks for saying it. Please do not hesitate to say it again and again and again ..., for
To sin by silence
when they should protest
makes cowards of men
Abraham Lincoln
Please, Have an open mind. Don't make statements like this.
IV has people from across the globe and each country has its own issues. We are trying to deal with the issues in the US and lets focus on that and not drag in other countries as examples (good or bad).
Thanks for saying it. Please do not hesitate to say it again and again and again ..., for
To sin by silence
when they should protest
makes cowards of men
Abraham Lincoln
2011 free nature wallpaper computer
haifromsk@yahoo.com
02-21 02:28 PM
bump
more...
sweet23guyin
04-24 10:21 AM
Congratulations. Enjoy your freedom.
I have question, how do you get email? i mean do we mention email address in 485 apps. sorry it's not on my head what i have filled in 485. Just need to know where and how we provides email address. And help us with more information.
Create an account at
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/registercustomer.jsp
You will get updates of ur case through email.
I have question, how do you get email? i mean do we mention email address in 485 apps. sorry it's not on my head what i have filled in 485. Just need to know where and how we provides email address. And help us with more information.
Create an account at
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/registercustomer.jsp
You will get updates of ur case through email.
garybanz
09-27 11:16 AM
I have worked in France and Belgium for a little over an year and this is my personal experience - the work environment at that time 2000 - 01 was alright. However, I had to struggle with language barriers and worse of all - the keyboard barriers. The standards in IT industry were very very different and though it was an experience, the learning curve was huge. Personally, I would much rather prefer to be in US or better still in UAE I'd think.
Next, I have been reading a lot about reverse brain drain - where families were going back home. I also heard about some site about return2India.com. And my brother took the step after pondering over it for an year - he had it all - GC, a family here, job at you know where in Seattle - and his experience has been an enlightment - he is now struggling with work life ratio - he spends most of the day/night at work and he has to pay bills at the bank and he has no clue what is going on at the school and somehow, his team in India thinks he is a smartass because he tries to apply certain standards (which ofcourse is normal here) and he speaks with an accent. And yes, if you studied here and lived for 10 years, you too will have the accent. But, he says he is very satisfied and happy to be there.And then he says, the pay scale is sufficient for him and his family to lead the Indian dream. We should have some way of commuicating with such expatriates too!!!
Thanks for sharing your brothers experience with us. My sister and Brother in law also took a similar decision about 2 years back and yes they were quite frustrated too, my brother in law even started looking for options to come back to US, for some reason he never returned .
Now they are pretty comfortable, they feel that it takes a while to get adjusted to India again but once they got used to living life the India way they just loved it...now they keep trying convince me to go back ;)
Next, I have been reading a lot about reverse brain drain - where families were going back home. I also heard about some site about return2India.com. And my brother took the step after pondering over it for an year - he had it all - GC, a family here, job at you know where in Seattle - and his experience has been an enlightment - he is now struggling with work life ratio - he spends most of the day/night at work and he has to pay bills at the bank and he has no clue what is going on at the school and somehow, his team in India thinks he is a smartass because he tries to apply certain standards (which ofcourse is normal here) and he speaks with an accent. And yes, if you studied here and lived for 10 years, you too will have the accent. But, he says he is very satisfied and happy to be there.And then he says, the pay scale is sufficient for him and his family to lead the Indian dream. We should have some way of commuicating with such expatriates too!!!
Thanks for sharing your brothers experience with us. My sister and Brother in law also took a similar decision about 2 years back and yes they were quite frustrated too, my brother in law even started looking for options to come back to US, for some reason he never returned .
Now they are pretty comfortable, they feel that it takes a while to get adjusted to India again but once they got used to living life the India way they just loved it...now they keep trying convince me to go back ;)
more...
nixstor
03-18 05:17 PM
I can use some help if I am missing some things here.
Snip from 202 a 5 (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=sethitdoc&doc_hit=1&doc_searchcontext=jump&s_context=jump&s_action=newSearch&s_method=applyFilter&s_fieldSearch=nxthomecollectionid|SLB&s_fieldSearch=foliodestination|act202a&s_type=all&hash=0-0-0-1435)
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Paragraph in the above corresond to each category. So paragraph 1 is EB1. Paragraph 2 is EB2 and so on. So the translation is what the VB exactly said.
What does 203 (b) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 say?
Define EB1-EB5 categories. Find it here (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/DocView/slbid/1/2/15?hilite=).
I posted the same Q on Ron Gotcher's forum this afternoon and my post did not go through to be moderated (I got the message that the post was submitted and will be posted after moderator approves it) or the mod chose not to post it.
Snip from 202 a 5 (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=sethitdoc&doc_hit=1&doc_searchcontext=jump&s_context=jump&s_action=newSearch&s_method=applyFilter&s_fieldSearch=nxthomecollectionid|SLB&s_fieldSearch=foliodestination|act202a&s_type=all&hash=0-0-0-1435)
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Paragraph in the above corresond to each category. So paragraph 1 is EB1. Paragraph 2 is EB2 and so on. So the translation is what the VB exactly said.
What does 203 (b) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 say?
Define EB1-EB5 categories. Find it here (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/DocView/slbid/1/2/15?hilite=).
I posted the same Q on Ron Gotcher's forum this afternoon and my post did not go through to be moderated (I got the message that the post was submitted and will be posted after moderator approves it) or the mod chose not to post it.
2010 Wild berries, free nature
kutra
03-05 06:26 PM
I think that everybody has the right to express their opinion.
Anything else is sensorship
good luck to all
That is true. But I would rather bicker/argue among ourselves in our closed community and not in front of the public. I withdrew my post because singhsa3 is inviting media and other outlets to view this poll. I see no good coming out of washing our dirty linen in public.
I am neither convinced by singhsa3's arguments and nor do I buy into the whole "potential-to-buy-houses" angle (and I got red-dotted for all my previous posts, but I don't care), but if he's willing to take the efforts because he believes in what he's doing, then I don't have to be the all-freedom-of-speech guy.
So long as singhsa3's not pledging that I and my wife will buy our house #2 and house #3 only because USCIS gives us green cards, I am fine with continuing with my life and work. :)
Anything else is sensorship
good luck to all
That is true. But I would rather bicker/argue among ourselves in our closed community and not in front of the public. I withdrew my post because singhsa3 is inviting media and other outlets to view this poll. I see no good coming out of washing our dirty linen in public.
I am neither convinced by singhsa3's arguments and nor do I buy into the whole "potential-to-buy-houses" angle (and I got red-dotted for all my previous posts, but I don't care), but if he's willing to take the efforts because he believes in what he's doing, then I don't have to be the all-freedom-of-speech guy.
So long as singhsa3's not pledging that I and my wife will buy our house #2 and house #3 only because USCIS gives us green cards, I am fine with continuing with my life and work. :)
more...
neelu
12-13 01:01 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
hair Free Nature (30) Wallpapers
ashkam
07-24 11:17 AM
I'm not sure what the controversy is : The I-485 application instructions clearly say (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485instr.pdf) that for an employment-based (I-140 based) AOS application, you have to provide the employment offer letter as initial evidence.
"Employment Letter.
If your adjustment of status application is related to an employment based visa petition (Form I-140), you must submit a letter on the letterhead of the petitioning employer which confirms that the job on which the visa petition is based is still available to you. The letter must also state the salary that will be paid."
"Employment Letter.
If your adjustment of status application is related to an employment based visa petition (Form I-140), you must submit a letter on the letterhead of the petitioning employer which confirms that the job on which the visa petition is based is still available to you. The letter must also state the salary that will be paid."
more...
GreenCardVirus
01-27 10:29 AM
Name Check is haunting quite many of those seeking Citizenship and Green Card.
This is not an issue of law. It is an issue of effenciency.
My case has been stuck up in Name Check for over 600 days now.
This is not an issue of law. It is an issue of effenciency.
My case has been stuck up in Name Check for over 600 days now.
hot wallpaper computer nature.
Humhongekamyab
03-09 01:18 PM
Guys,
I have been here 18 yrs and still waiting. You are lucky if you get it in 16 yrs. Ofcourse not all my 18 yrs have been in GC queue.
9 years and counting.
I have been here 18 yrs and still waiting. You are lucky if you get it in 16 yrs. Ofcourse not all my 18 yrs have been in GC queue.
9 years and counting.
more...
house topic nature backgrounds
GCKaMaara
10-15 01:02 PM
OK. May be my post was little misguiding. I never intended to distinguish EB3 and EB2 situations. We all are in same boat. Just need to counter the issue - one of the proposal was to do a flower campaign. I am not sure you were on forum when we did last time. It was a huge success. I am requesting to do it one more time!
I support the idea of flower campaign. ItIsNotFunny, what is the date you are proposing?
I support the idea of flower campaign. ItIsNotFunny, what is the date you are proposing?
tattoo trees wallpaper. computer
gsc999
09-20 02:37 AM
Congratulations to all of us for having marched yesterday, I was extremely impressed with the level of organization. Salut to everyone who made it possible.
However, I have a whole bunch of points, sorry if they come out strong....
1) I absolutely agree with the 'Legal' Immigration issue, we did look as if we were immigrants and not defined as legal, I think high-skilled is secondary to the legality... This is one of the reasons I have not purchased merchandise, as it looks like it addresses immigration as such. I think banner by Chinese group exphasizing the legal aspect looked very impressive..
2) It was obvious from speeches on Monday night and yesterday (friendship between US and India comments, etc) that this is seen as an Indian issue. Unless you are trying to show it as such, something has to be done about it. Non-indians were marching with you as well, and next time effort should be made to put together Indian, Chinese and whoever else when putting pictures, RollCall for example, or talking to the press, or talking to representatives. I have expressed my desire and submitted all information to the person in charge of organizing meetings on Capitol Hill, but was not provided with this oppportunity..
Basically, it was clear that, as of now, even many representatives see the issue as Indians versus Mexicans... Not a good idea....
3) I thought that some of the signs were extremely offensive to the Americans "We brought you yahoo/hotmail/google" and as such... if I were an American contemplating about my views on the immigration, and if I were as patriotic as many Americans are, I would be upset with the messages putting down local brains...
4) It was a very impressive effort by Chinese group, thumbs up. Although very strange that so ew of them showed up. My CHinese colleague who alreday has GC and helped distribute info to his friends, told me that all 5 Chinese papers in the area had big announcements about the Rally
5) I agree with disappointment about local people, it seemed like there were many more members from CA, NY and other places than VA/MD/DC, we should all be wokring on raising awareness.
All for now
Agains, congrats to all of us
----
Good observation.
Here is my response. to point # 1 & #3.
Look, legal immigration is not just restricted to employment based immigration, it includes family based immigration. So if you say you support legal immigration that doesn't differentiate your message, infact, compared to 950K family based annual visas only 140K go to employment based legal immigrants. IV's agenda is employment based immigration. We are very clear about where we stand.
Now point # 3. No Americans are not upset about confronting the reality about Hotmail, Google and other companies that create jobs for Americans. How can they, we are a country of immigrants. These placards were carefully selected and a lot of due diligence went into their selection and all of them had a positive message.
Having said that, if you notice none of the IV members who attended the rally ever congratulated the Indian or English core members. Your post is the first post which thanks individual communities.
I agree with rest of your message and that is why we need more support from members like you to bring diversity to IV. This is not an Indian organization and we never claim it to be. We need your paricipation to prove that point.
However, I have a whole bunch of points, sorry if they come out strong....
1) I absolutely agree with the 'Legal' Immigration issue, we did look as if we were immigrants and not defined as legal, I think high-skilled is secondary to the legality... This is one of the reasons I have not purchased merchandise, as it looks like it addresses immigration as such. I think banner by Chinese group exphasizing the legal aspect looked very impressive..
2) It was obvious from speeches on Monday night and yesterday (friendship between US and India comments, etc) that this is seen as an Indian issue. Unless you are trying to show it as such, something has to be done about it. Non-indians were marching with you as well, and next time effort should be made to put together Indian, Chinese and whoever else when putting pictures, RollCall for example, or talking to the press, or talking to representatives. I have expressed my desire and submitted all information to the person in charge of organizing meetings on Capitol Hill, but was not provided with this oppportunity..
Basically, it was clear that, as of now, even many representatives see the issue as Indians versus Mexicans... Not a good idea....
3) I thought that some of the signs were extremely offensive to the Americans "We brought you yahoo/hotmail/google" and as such... if I were an American contemplating about my views on the immigration, and if I were as patriotic as many Americans are, I would be upset with the messages putting down local brains...
4) It was a very impressive effort by Chinese group, thumbs up. Although very strange that so ew of them showed up. My CHinese colleague who alreday has GC and helped distribute info to his friends, told me that all 5 Chinese papers in the area had big announcements about the Rally
5) I agree with disappointment about local people, it seemed like there were many more members from CA, NY and other places than VA/MD/DC, we should all be wokring on raising awareness.
All for now
Agains, congrats to all of us
----
Good observation.
Here is my response. to point # 1 & #3.
Look, legal immigration is not just restricted to employment based immigration, it includes family based immigration. So if you say you support legal immigration that doesn't differentiate your message, infact, compared to 950K family based annual visas only 140K go to employment based legal immigrants. IV's agenda is employment based immigration. We are very clear about where we stand.
Now point # 3. No Americans are not upset about confronting the reality about Hotmail, Google and other companies that create jobs for Americans. How can they, we are a country of immigrants. These placards were carefully selected and a lot of due diligence went into their selection and all of them had a positive message.
Having said that, if you notice none of the IV members who attended the rally ever congratulated the Indian or English core members. Your post is the first post which thanks individual communities.
I agree with rest of your message and that is why we need more support from members like you to bring diversity to IV. This is not an Indian organization and we never claim it to be. We need your paricipation to prove that point.
more...
pictures wallpaper computer nature.
rajagram
02-12 07:36 AM
Hi
I am regular reader of immigration voice as well, I am also able to pick some people from Hotel and drop them back to Hotel on advocacy days.
I am regular reader of immigration voice as well, I am also able to pick some people from Hotel and drop them back to Hotel on advocacy days.
dresses nature wallpaper computer.
moonrah
07-02 12:54 PM
IV core has not put this priority, that must be some good reasons behind that. It will help other communities to know the reasons, so that efforts are not diversified and all can work toward one single efforts. IV core please?
more...
makeup wallpaper computer nature.
prioritydate
12-20 07:05 PM
I was under the impression that 10 - 15 days gap or 1 month gap can be justified as vacation or sick leave as long as "employer - employee " relations exists (not terminated by the employer). One whole year cannot be justified under this.
What would you do if no one is calling for an interview? It is not like I didn't managed to get a job. Nobody called me for an interview. At least, the Desi consulting company that I have joined, didn't managed to arrange an interview.
What would you do if no one is calling for an interview? It is not like I didn't managed to get a job. Nobody called me for an interview. At least, the Desi consulting company that I have joined, didn't managed to arrange an interview.
girlfriend wallpaper computer nature. wallpaper computer nature.
matreen
10-28 11:42 PM
PD = Jan 29, 2007
I40 = Aprroved = April, 2007
485 = Receipt Date, July, 12 2007
I40 = Aprroved = April, 2007
485 = Receipt Date, July, 12 2007
hairstyles wallpaper computer nature. wallpaper computer nature.
komaragiri
08-29 05:52 PM
This is totally wate of time. Please delete this thread.
Let's not discuss on who is best and who is worst. Focus on the future action items for IV. Discuss more about those items, so that we all can get out of this mess and live happily.
Let's not discuss on who is best and who is worst. Focus on the future action items for IV. Discuss more about those items, so that we all can get out of this mess and live happily.
lord_labaku
11-11 12:54 PM
is to play the same tune. We should repeat the Obama campaign taglines.
We should re-iterate that high skilled immigrants are the CHANGE that America is looking for.
We are going to help generate jobs in America. We are going to keep America in the forefront in technology. We are going to make America competitive again. We the high skilled immigrants are going to restore prosperity to America. We are going to research new energy sources. We will renew Americas promise -
"It is that American spirit - that American promise - that pushes us forward even when the path is uncertain; that binds us together in spite of our differences; that makes us fix our eye not on what is seen, but what is unseen, that better place around the bend."
Yes We can.
We should re-iterate that high skilled immigrants are the CHANGE that America is looking for.
We are going to help generate jobs in America. We are going to keep America in the forefront in technology. We are going to make America competitive again. We the high skilled immigrants are going to restore prosperity to America. We are going to research new energy sources. We will renew Americas promise -
"It is that American spirit - that American promise - that pushes us forward even when the path is uncertain; that binds us together in spite of our differences; that makes us fix our eye not on what is seen, but what is unseen, that better place around the bend."
Yes We can.
americandesi
12-20 04:30 PM
Your PD is Dec, 2004. Why you think you'll get RFE for not working during 2001?
Are you sure about this? Refer the following thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6205
Are you sure about this? Refer the following thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6205
No comments:
Post a Comment