kedrex
07-18 08:02 PM
bump it up - this is way too important!
wallpaper hair Pink Background Designs.
ewana
08-26 12:11 AM
Thanks willigetagc and sayantan76 for your reply.
According to company lawyer i am preliminary discussing this issue with, she mentioned the EB1 can take 12-18 months at best, that why the concern that the foreign office might be close by then. I'm not from India/China, so there should be no priority date issue. How realistic do you guys think is it to get the whole process done in 90 days or so as mentioned sayantan76 ?
willigetagc, you mentioned about getting the EAD quickly. Once you got your EAD , does it mean that you will be still be on status even if the foreign office is closed by that time ?
H1B is probably the last option due to low probability of success and I would probably be out of status by that time.
Can you guys recommend some good immigration lawyer that you or your friends used that I can probably consult (I'm in the LA area) ? My email is ewana@gmail.com (in case it is now allowed in the forum or for privacy purposes). I'm the only employee on working visa on the company and it seems like the company lawyer is not very adept with immigration stuff.
Thanks a lot for all your help. greatly appreciate it.
According to company lawyer i am preliminary discussing this issue with, she mentioned the EB1 can take 12-18 months at best, that why the concern that the foreign office might be close by then. I'm not from India/China, so there should be no priority date issue. How realistic do you guys think is it to get the whole process done in 90 days or so as mentioned sayantan76 ?
willigetagc, you mentioned about getting the EAD quickly. Once you got your EAD , does it mean that you will be still be on status even if the foreign office is closed by that time ?
H1B is probably the last option due to low probability of success and I would probably be out of status by that time.
Can you guys recommend some good immigration lawyer that you or your friends used that I can probably consult (I'm in the LA area) ? My email is ewana@gmail.com (in case it is now allowed in the forum or for privacy purposes). I'm the only employee on working visa on the company and it seems like the company lawyer is not very adept with immigration stuff.
Thanks a lot for all your help. greatly appreciate it.
senthil1
02-04 12:58 PM
Most of your points are ok. But someone has to arrive with a calculation that how much improvement will EB3 get. If it is atleast 2 years then the time and money spent may be Ok. I am sure EB2 will get a very big benefit and I doubt EB3 will get much benefit. My assumption may be wrong. If it is ok even for small benefit we can go ahead with this campaign as the main aim is to remove unfairness in law.
I have to say that I am a bit ticked off by your ignorance. Did not expect this from someone who has been a long time member. You should have thought it through. See my response below.
I have to say that I am a bit ticked off by your ignorance. Did not expect this from someone who has been a long time member. You should have thought it through. See my response below.
2011 Pink Flowers Backgrounds
tinamatthew
07-24 01:52 PM
should such people just wait hoping they will receive an RFE (I don't like this one at all) whenever the case is opened? TINA WROTE: For initial evidence items I believed that it would be automatically rejected if not included, HOWEVER, with the new press release from USCIS on July 23, if i-485s WITHOUT medical reports will be accepted, then what is an employment letter? abhijitp WROTE: I hope that is true. AILA seems to be working on this. I am happy to believe it if USCIS issues a press release to that effect... high hopes:-)
pls find above the answers.
USCIS has released a press release July 23, 2007. Check QUESTION 13
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
pls find above the answers.
USCIS has released a press release July 23, 2007. Check QUESTION 13
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
more...
wandmaker
08-21 04:34 PM
Has anyone else dealt with this or can you direct me to someone who knows what needs to be done and how?
Most of the people here are under employment based green cards - So, I would recommend get yourself an attorney.
Most of the people here are under employment based green cards - So, I would recommend get yourself an attorney.
sanju
10-20 02:21 PM
well said.. but wait a minute.. why are we all debating.. we dont have voting rights... :D:D:D.. but whoever thinks mccain is the savior... god help them
Look, no one is saying that McCain is the savior, but at the same time, it is important for us to understand that Obama is not the light at the end of the tunnel, its the fast approaching train towards us. So, some of us are just pointing to others that be prepared for the train wreck. That does not necessarily translate into saying that McCain is the savior. It just means what it means.
And you are right, none of us can vote. But if this community supports Obama, its like 300 million Americans voting for the President who works against the interest of majority of Americans. Won't we also be guided by the "misguided" ideology and rhetoric if we act in the same manner.
The irony of the situation is, we are caught between the rock and the hard place. Some of us are saying its better to stay on rocks, others are preaching that its better to be caught in the hard place. That's all.
.
Look, no one is saying that McCain is the savior, but at the same time, it is important for us to understand that Obama is not the light at the end of the tunnel, its the fast approaching train towards us. So, some of us are just pointing to others that be prepared for the train wreck. That does not necessarily translate into saying that McCain is the savior. It just means what it means.
And you are right, none of us can vote. But if this community supports Obama, its like 300 million Americans voting for the President who works against the interest of majority of Americans. Won't we also be guided by the "misguided" ideology and rhetoric if we act in the same manner.
The irony of the situation is, we are caught between the rock and the hard place. Some of us are saying its better to stay on rocks, others are preaching that its better to be caught in the hard place. That's all.
.
more...
techmia
07-01 04:40 PM
Everyone is busy partying.
2010 Simple+ackgrounds+designs
485InDreams
09-26 09:33 AM
I jus send the mail to editor...
I've also send the link to businessweek and Nytimes..where they have written it correctly...
I've also send the link to businessweek and Nytimes..where they have written it correctly...
more...
ajay
03-23 10:58 PM
Labor Filed Sept 2004
Labor Got Dec 2005
I140 Premium Processing Feb 2006
I485 Aug 17 2007
Eid Filed Dec 2007 and Got it in Feb 2008
Labor Got Dec 2005
I140 Premium Processing Feb 2006
I485 Aug 17 2007
Eid Filed Dec 2007 and Got it in Feb 2008
hair Pink - Abstract Colour and
mirage
07-13 07:54 AM
Please correct your spelling of Murthy. I thought some senator or Congressman Murphy wrote to DOS. If it was murthy I wouldn't have bothered to come on this thread. She is a big time crook. Shamelessly she's trying to take credit of everything that we are doing here under 1 banner called immigrationvoice she will take credit of Zoe Lofgren and everybody else. She has never ever mentioned immigrationvoice for anything in her so called updates.
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
......
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
......
more...
amitjoey
01-18 11:48 AM
Guys, this is the time to show the core group that we are a bunch of people thankful that there is IV to help us fight this fight.
We need to stand united and raise awareness and sign up for the $20minimum a month recurring contribution.
I understand that some of you do intend to contribute and have contributed generously in the past,
But here are some mindsets, All of us fall in these 4 mindsets.
1) you probably think "why should I sign up for a monthly recurring contribution program". I am a generous contributor and I contribute almost monthly anyways.
2) I have contributed enough.
3) I will contribute if I feel like, when I see something comming out of this effort.
4) I do not have to contribute.
If you are in category 1).I can tell you, I understand because I have been a generous contributer in the past. But guys, the reason I signed up for a monthly recurring contribution is that it helps IV know that 'X' amount of funds are guaranted every month, this way they can better plan.
Category 2) Contributed enough - Okay why dont just sign up for a minimum amount of $20/month once more. What is enough is not enough.
Category 3) This has been discussed, I do not want to talk about this category of members.
Category 4) Again - No Comments-
Lets show the core team that all of us fall in the first 2 categories.
The last thing we want the core to do is bite their fingers over funds. We want do not want the core to get stressed out over funds. They have enough real work to do already.
Inspite of being a serious team player, and a generous contributor it took me two days to sign up for the recurring monthly contribution program, so I give all of the ones that have not set up a monthly recurring contribution benefit of doubt. But this is our last chance, I urge you to be one of the 1000 people we need for this effort.
We need to stand united and raise awareness and sign up for the $20minimum a month recurring contribution.
I understand that some of you do intend to contribute and have contributed generously in the past,
But here are some mindsets, All of us fall in these 4 mindsets.
1) you probably think "why should I sign up for a monthly recurring contribution program". I am a generous contributor and I contribute almost monthly anyways.
2) I have contributed enough.
3) I will contribute if I feel like, when I see something comming out of this effort.
4) I do not have to contribute.
If you are in category 1).I can tell you, I understand because I have been a generous contributer in the past. But guys, the reason I signed up for a monthly recurring contribution is that it helps IV know that 'X' amount of funds are guaranted every month, this way they can better plan.
Category 2) Contributed enough - Okay why dont just sign up for a minimum amount of $20/month once more. What is enough is not enough.
Category 3) This has been discussed, I do not want to talk about this category of members.
Category 4) Again - No Comments-
Lets show the core team that all of us fall in the first 2 categories.
The last thing we want the core to do is bite their fingers over funds. We want do not want the core to get stressed out over funds. They have enough real work to do already.
Inspite of being a serious team player, and a generous contributor it took me two days to sign up for the recurring monthly contribution program, so I give all of the ones that have not set up a monthly recurring contribution benefit of doubt. But this is our last chance, I urge you to be one of the 1000 people we need for this effort.
hot Pink Cascade
nandakumar
12-27 06:07 PM
There are couple of postings in Murthy.com
Please participate so that others can view and potentially could become members of IV
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2704080912&m=7141062241
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2994050912&m=5171092241
Please participate so that others can view and potentially could become members of IV
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2704080912&m=7141062241
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2994050912&m=5171092241
more...
house Clock “Pink Background”
richi121175
01-17 02:19 PM
I tried to send you something in a private msg but your quota is fullShameless creatures, not even a single guy came and blasted me out for such comments ..! This means that I am telling the truth. You guys don't even have any self dignity left to come and face off with me.
:mad: :mad:
:mad: :mad:
tattoo pink web designs. Odopod
GCBatman
01-09 08:54 AM
Here is the answer would you hire me now :D
When several operations occur in an expression, each part is evaluated and resolved in a predetermined order called operator precedence. Parentheses can be used to override the order of precedence and force some parts of an expression to be evaluated before other parts. Operations within parentheses are always performed before those outside. Within parentheses, however, normal operator precedence is maintained.
When expressions contain operators from more than one category, arithmetic operators are evaluated first, comparison operators are evaluated next, and logical operators are evaluated last. Comparison operators all have equal precedence; that is, they are evaluated in the left-to-right order in which they appear. Arithmetic and logical operators are evaluated in the following order of precedence:
Arithmetic (Exponentiation (^),Negation (-),Multiplication and division (*, /),Integer division (\),Modulus arithmetic (Mod),Addition and subtraction (+, -),String concatenation (&))
Comparison (Equality (=),Inequality (<>),Less than (<),Greater than (>), Less than or equal to (<=),Greater than or equal to (>=),Is)
Logical (Not,And,Or,Xor,Eqv,Imp,&)
When multiplication and division occur together in an expression, each operation is evaluated as it occurs from left to right. Likewise, when addition and subtraction occur together in an expression, each operation is evaluated in order of appearance from left to right.
The string concatenation operator (&) is not an arithmetic operator, but in precedence it does fall after all arithmetic operators and before all comparison operators. The Is operator is an object reference comparison operator. It does not compare objects or their values; it checks only to determine if two object references refer to the same object.
....An experience guy might find it difficult to answer questions like �what is operator precedence?� ....
When several operations occur in an expression, each part is evaluated and resolved in a predetermined order called operator precedence. Parentheses can be used to override the order of precedence and force some parts of an expression to be evaluated before other parts. Operations within parentheses are always performed before those outside. Within parentheses, however, normal operator precedence is maintained.
When expressions contain operators from more than one category, arithmetic operators are evaluated first, comparison operators are evaluated next, and logical operators are evaluated last. Comparison operators all have equal precedence; that is, they are evaluated in the left-to-right order in which they appear. Arithmetic and logical operators are evaluated in the following order of precedence:
Arithmetic (Exponentiation (^),Negation (-),Multiplication and division (*, /),Integer division (\),Modulus arithmetic (Mod),Addition and subtraction (+, -),String concatenation (&))
Comparison (Equality (=),Inequality (<>),Less than (<),Greater than (>), Less than or equal to (<=),Greater than or equal to (>=),Is)
Logical (Not,And,Or,Xor,Eqv,Imp,&)
When multiplication and division occur together in an expression, each operation is evaluated as it occurs from left to right. Likewise, when addition and subtraction occur together in an expression, each operation is evaluated in order of appearance from left to right.
The string concatenation operator (&) is not an arithmetic operator, but in precedence it does fall after all arithmetic operators and before all comparison operators. The Is operator is an object reference comparison operator. It does not compare objects or their values; it checks only to determine if two object references refer to the same object.
....An experience guy might find it difficult to answer questions like �what is operator precedence?� ....
more...
pictures two-toned pink backgrounds
kutra
03-03 06:51 PM
Some of the data can be obtained from here
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/PERM_Data_FY07_Announcement.pdf
of course it is not complete but gives a good glimpse.
Now, you show me your 10 billion dollars :)
My 10 billion dollars can be found here: http://www.prankplace.com/funnymoney.htm :D
BTW, your PDF is data for people who filed under PERM in 2007, and not for the audience you are including in your letter.
Anyway, I am going to stop playing devil's advocate and let you manage this. Just make sure you don't invite unnecessary attention by asking outlets to come peeking here.
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/PERM_Data_FY07_Announcement.pdf
of course it is not complete but gives a good glimpse.
Now, you show me your 10 billion dollars :)
My 10 billion dollars can be found here: http://www.prankplace.com/funnymoney.htm :D
BTW, your PDF is data for people who filed under PERM in 2007, and not for the audience you are including in your letter.
Anyway, I am going to stop playing devil's advocate and let you manage this. Just make sure you don't invite unnecessary attention by asking outlets to come peeking here.
dresses JoJo Designs Pink amp; Green
go_gc_way
01-13 10:37 PM
http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?p=850460#post850460
http://www.indiacause.com/services/advt/advt_lst_one.asp?srno=10394
perm2gc, very good efforts .... I am hopeful, with members like you , we will inch towards our goal "GC".
At the same time, I hope other members take time and help IV action items.
http://www.indiacause.com/services/advt/advt_lst_one.asp?srno=10394
perm2gc, very good efforts .... I am hopeful, with members like you , we will inch towards our goal "GC".
At the same time, I hope other members take time and help IV action items.
more...
makeup Is a ackground design,
vin
06-12 02:06 PM
I don't think they're considering the Cantwell amendment. The only amendments being considered are as below. Go to http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,280993,00.html (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,280993,00.html)for complete article
Proposed Resolution to the Standoff
One of the proposals to overcome the impasse is to offer a limited list of Republican-sought amendments that could be considered before a final vote on the measure.
Bill supporters say, for now, their strategy is to get a list of proposed amendments from the authors of the border security letter � Sens. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, Mike Enzi of Wyoming, David Vitter of Louisiana, Jim Bunning of Kentucky, Charles Grassley of Iowa, John Ensign of Nevada and Jeff Sessions of Alabama.
�The details of exactly how we get from where we are now to the finish line is not something we�re prepared to announce today but I do think this bill is about 80 or 85 percent of the way through toward the finish line and we don�t have any interest in giving up on it,� Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said after meeting with the president.
Proposed Resolution to the Standoff
One of the proposals to overcome the impasse is to offer a limited list of Republican-sought amendments that could be considered before a final vote on the measure.
Bill supporters say, for now, their strategy is to get a list of proposed amendments from the authors of the border security letter � Sens. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, Mike Enzi of Wyoming, David Vitter of Louisiana, Jim Bunning of Kentucky, Charles Grassley of Iowa, John Ensign of Nevada and Jeff Sessions of Alabama.
�The details of exactly how we get from where we are now to the finish line is not something we�re prepared to announce today but I do think this bill is about 80 or 85 percent of the way through toward the finish line and we don�t have any interest in giving up on it,� Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said after meeting with the president.
girlfriend Backgrounds (Vol.4) - Pink
cygent
03-21 04:35 PM
Hello all,
How do you determine if the category filed is EB2 or EB3? How can you find that out from which document?
Thanks!
How do you determine if the category filed is EB2 or EB3? How can you find that out from which document?
Thanks!
hairstyles The Baby Postage design is
deafTunes123
02-21 01:12 PM
As per my Lawyer, You can file I-140 under both Eb2 and EB3(Porting PD from EB3 to EB2 or vice-versa). which ever the Date becomes current, you can ask the IO to use that particular category.
delhiguy
07-04 08:03 PM
Excellent
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
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.
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.
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.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
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.
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.
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
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.
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.
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.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
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.
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.
santa123
01-26 12:45 AM
Pls participate & write to CIS on your hardships
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=312718#post312718
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=312718#post312718
No comments:
Post a Comment