eb3_nepa
07-05 01:56 PM
eb3_nepa has a colored , structured presentation layer based on the core ideas that you have... This is probably termed Reusability in IT world :-)
Take it easy - I'm kidding !
I love this idea and hinted about it in a more crude way :) :)
Its not about individualistic ideas, but a collection of all good ideas.
Make ALL advanced features such as PMing, emailing members on the forums, accessible to paid members. We are not asking for much JUST $10. If a guy cant pay $10 and that too to basically ask questions, then maybe we dont WANT them on the site, hogging bandwidth.
Take it easy - I'm kidding !
I love this idea and hinted about it in a more crude way :) :)
Its not about individualistic ideas, but a collection of all good ideas.
Make ALL advanced features such as PMing, emailing members on the forums, accessible to paid members. We are not asking for much JUST $10. If a guy cant pay $10 and that too to basically ask questions, then maybe we dont WANT them on the site, hogging bandwidth.
wallpaper Best tattoo ever
Jbpvisa
07-12 11:01 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
needGCcool
03-12 09:51 AM
I do care for the dates..but I am more disappointed with the language you use....This is a public forum...Learn some manners is all my point was to you.
Aadarniyah Mittar,
Aapki date current nahi hooyi toh mera kya kasoor...Lagta hai aapko bhi October tak inteyaar karna padega.
Aadarniyah Mittar,
Aapki date current nahi hooyi toh mera kya kasoor...Lagta hai aapko bhi October tak inteyaar karna padega.
2011 Best Tattoos Ever!
H1Girl
03-10 04:52 PM
....
Any one donation NOT to be less than $100 PLEASE.
I believe that the goal of Visa Re-capture is worth more than that even if you are making multiple donations.
Please pardon me for my ignorance but why is that every admin fix will work with money in this country?
Does this mean we have to pay money to fix something in the system that will be useful to this country (eg: Senetors take the money and introduce the bills. Do you guys think it is equvalent to Bribe in other countries?)
I could recall that July '07 fiasco has been fixed without we donate anything.
Yes, I know that nothing is free in this country however I am not sure why should we pay bribe (or whatever you call) to fix something in the system?
These senetrors should have minimum knowledge that if they give GCs to us then we will flourish the economy in return. That is my point...
Any one donation NOT to be less than $100 PLEASE.
I believe that the goal of Visa Re-capture is worth more than that even if you are making multiple donations.
Please pardon me for my ignorance but why is that every admin fix will work with money in this country?
Does this mean we have to pay money to fix something in the system that will be useful to this country (eg: Senetors take the money and introduce the bills. Do you guys think it is equvalent to Bribe in other countries?)
I could recall that July '07 fiasco has been fixed without we donate anything.
Yes, I know that nothing is free in this country however I am not sure why should we pay bribe (or whatever you call) to fix something in the system?
These senetrors should have minimum knowledge that if they give GCs to us then we will flourish the economy in return. That is my point...
more...
rajuram
01-28 11:00 AM
In the new year, I have not seen any posts expalining how IV is "working" on resolving our issues. All that is posted now is requests for money. I know more money is needed and would be glad to contribute, if only the senior members show that some serious efforts are being made in the background. Yes IV did do very good work last year, but that is history now; but what work is going on now, nobody knows. Don't need details, but even broad details will help. Is something being done for appropriation bills, no one knows or tells.
For example, after the elections no attempts virtually no attempts have been done to do webfax campaign tragetted towards pro-immigration inclined politicians. No lists have been made of such politicians. Just by waking up few days before the bills are discussed is not going to help.
Rajuram
You got couple of things wrong here. Passing a legislation is not a piece
of cake. It would take sometimes years persistent effort. Contributing
a few hundred or even a thousand dollars and expecting everything to be
changed would be too ridiculous. Several tech lobbies are also lobbying
hard for similar things. And they spend money in millions. Any man with commonsense could understand how difficult things if those powerful business could not take care this.
Now u may ask, if these tech lobbies cannot take care of it how could a small group like us do it? Last year when CIR was passed in the senate, there was a catch int. It would have imposed hard country quota. With IVs work we were able to remove that hard cap clause from the bill. The bottom line is that we may not be able to pass a huge bill, but we could get sevearl smaller bills in peacemeals that would help our cause.
If we keep on working on it, eventually some doors will open for us. But nobody is not sure when thats going to happen. So here is my take on this whole drama. I'll support IV for next 3 years. And if nothing happens I'll pack my bags. :D :D :D
Now good luck on your GC
For example, after the elections no attempts virtually no attempts have been done to do webfax campaign tragetted towards pro-immigration inclined politicians. No lists have been made of such politicians. Just by waking up few days before the bills are discussed is not going to help.
Rajuram
You got couple of things wrong here. Passing a legislation is not a piece
of cake. It would take sometimes years persistent effort. Contributing
a few hundred or even a thousand dollars and expecting everything to be
changed would be too ridiculous. Several tech lobbies are also lobbying
hard for similar things. And they spend money in millions. Any man with commonsense could understand how difficult things if those powerful business could not take care this.
Now u may ask, if these tech lobbies cannot take care of it how could a small group like us do it? Last year when CIR was passed in the senate, there was a catch int. It would have imposed hard country quota. With IVs work we were able to remove that hard cap clause from the bill. The bottom line is that we may not be able to pass a huge bill, but we could get sevearl smaller bills in peacemeals that would help our cause.
If we keep on working on it, eventually some doors will open for us. But nobody is not sure when thats going to happen. So here is my take on this whole drama. I'll support IV for next 3 years. And if nothing happens I'll pack my bags. :D :D :D
Now good luck on your GC
Macaca
09-20 08:47 AM
Look, legal immigration is not just restricted to employment based immigration, it includes family based immigration.
In addition to family based immigration, legal immigration includes asylum, refugees (with a special category for Iraqi refugees) and may be more!
In addition to family based immigration, legal immigration includes asylum, refugees (with a special category for Iraqi refugees) and may be more!
more...
Ramba
07-04 07:25 PM
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.
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.
2010 of a tattoo. The est
pyaradesi
02-06 07:30 AM
Kudos to Team IV for keeping the flame alive even in such a situation. If anybody noticed, IV is probably the only organization making any noise about us EB folks right now.
Pappu and core team, awesome job, please continue with the efforts. I had a few ideas:
1. Can we highlight past distinguished immigrants who have come thru the EB channel.
2. The core team, can you please tell, is it realistic to expect congress to view EB separately from CIR?
3. A lot of us here, have American managers, who would in all probability vouch for us and highlight why they want us to get a GC. We could even quantify this in dollar amounts. Can we highlight this?
4. A flash went off in my head when I read about a march to DC, do you remember the Civil rights movement, Dr Martin Luther King Jr, can we use this great man for inspiration? After all, though our cause may not be even close to what African American suffered, there are parallels.
5. Can we take some airtime on tv/radio to highlight H1bs? Is it a good idea? Maybe tech magazines ads?
6. Compile a list of Congress man/women, Senators nationwide, their stance on EB quota removal, this will help us quantitatively identify where we stand.
7. Folks, we are in a very tough adversarial situation, let us not forget that 40 od years back, if not for Civil rights movement, we would not be here.
9. Are there any celebrities who would/could support our cause? Hollywood, u never know we may have support from the most unlikely places.
This apart, a question to the Gurus, is the DOS visa bulletin based on DOL labors filed for that month? Does DOS confer with DOL to see how many labor certs were filed for the next month to come up with the visa bulletin? If this is the case, the visa bulletin may move at a good pace this year and next, please correct if wrong.
IV Core team, please lead the way, even if there may not be 100% consensus.
Pappu and core team, awesome job, please continue with the efforts. I had a few ideas:
1. Can we highlight past distinguished immigrants who have come thru the EB channel.
2. The core team, can you please tell, is it realistic to expect congress to view EB separately from CIR?
3. A lot of us here, have American managers, who would in all probability vouch for us and highlight why they want us to get a GC. We could even quantify this in dollar amounts. Can we highlight this?
4. A flash went off in my head when I read about a march to DC, do you remember the Civil rights movement, Dr Martin Luther King Jr, can we use this great man for inspiration? After all, though our cause may not be even close to what African American suffered, there are parallels.
5. Can we take some airtime on tv/radio to highlight H1bs? Is it a good idea? Maybe tech magazines ads?
6. Compile a list of Congress man/women, Senators nationwide, their stance on EB quota removal, this will help us quantitatively identify where we stand.
7. Folks, we are in a very tough adversarial situation, let us not forget that 40 od years back, if not for Civil rights movement, we would not be here.
9. Are there any celebrities who would/could support our cause? Hollywood, u never know we may have support from the most unlikely places.
This apart, a question to the Gurus, is the DOS visa bulletin based on DOL labors filed for that month? Does DOS confer with DOL to see how many labor certs were filed for the next month to come up with the visa bulletin? If this is the case, the visa bulletin may move at a good pace this year and next, please correct if wrong.
IV Core team, please lead the way, even if there may not be 100% consensus.
more...
champu
02-13 09:18 PM
Its like what NAZIS did to Jews.. Cmon this is America, lets post this to President Obama's website
Administrator may consider removing this thread...
Content and even title is offensive. It may undermine our cause.
Administrator may consider removing this thread...
Content and even title is offensive. It may undermine our cause.
hair Best tattoo ever.
indrachat_75
06-30 09:57 PM
Does anyone know if Fedex or anyone accepts mails on Sunday to be delivered on Monday morning ? Please advice ASAP.
Thanks
Indra
Thanks
Indra
more...
srkamath
07-12 10:31 PM
Use of "01" instead of "10" has been common mistake by USCIS. I came across couple of such cases. This is typo error and they will fix it.
i guess i read too much into it........
i guess i read too much into it........
hot The est and worst tattoos
thecipher5
10-13 11:21 AM
feedfront, the receipt date on my I-485 receipt notice is October 5, 2007.
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Do you have attorney? It will be better if he/she write letter for status of the case. I had RFE in last year (around summer'09). My PD was current since Aug, but no change in the status or specific response (tried congressman, senator, SR). But, I got new RFE (medical report required) when my attorney contacted them. I don't know what triggered it, but my attorney contacted USCIS last (after I did not get any specific info from other sources).
You can write to USCIS director. Someone here in this forum wrote to director, when he did not get any progress on his SR.
What's your receipt date? I heard that they are using receipt date. I know couple of people (including myself) whose application was picked (or generated RFE) matched the pattern of receipt date not PD.
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Do you have attorney? It will be better if he/she write letter for status of the case. I had RFE in last year (around summer'09). My PD was current since Aug, but no change in the status or specific response (tried congressman, senator, SR). But, I got new RFE (medical report required) when my attorney contacted them. I don't know what triggered it, but my attorney contacted USCIS last (after I did not get any specific info from other sources).
You can write to USCIS director. Someone here in this forum wrote to director, when he did not get any progress on his SR.
What's your receipt date? I heard that they are using receipt date. I know couple of people (including myself) whose application was picked (or generated RFE) matched the pattern of receipt date not PD.
more...
house est Indian Tattoo Designs
mlk
03-10 08:15 AM
Nice renders Eilsoe and Grinch--both very dramatic. Here's mine--it feels unfinished but this is all I had time for.
http://www.inmod.com/casey/3dsubway_final.jpg
Very groovy. And I like to see XSI work because, well, I haven't seen a lot from this package !
Top notch, my favorite so far.
http://www.inmod.com/casey/3dsubway_final.jpg
Very groovy. And I like to see XSI work because, well, I haven't seen a lot from this package !
Top notch, my favorite so far.
tattoo est-tattoo-ever
hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:54 PM
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
Do you know that July 1st was a Sunday? A non-working day.
my 2 cents...
Do you know that July 1st was a Sunday? A non-working day.
more...
pictures Home » the est tattoo artist
gsc999
04-22 02:56 PM
Decipher and GSC999 have totally contradictory opinions . Not sure whom to believe here .:D . There seems to have been 2 sets of opinons here of the members who attended the rally.
---
I think you mean the conclusions we drew are different. Yes, as Congressman Gutierrez himself said yesterday. Some people, he was referring to Latinos who were opposing STRIVE, see STRIVE as glass half-empty. Others as half-full.
I will want to be in the latter category anyday.
The objective of the meeting was to show support for STRIVE, I think we acheived that. If your expectation was that there will only be IV members in the group and the congressman would focus exclusively on that issue. Sorry for the disappointment, welcome to politics. Lets learn from this.
Also, most members think that only anti-immigrants oppose STRIVE. That is not true. Undocumented immigrants also oppose STRIVE. When someone says ,"oh the whole thing was regarding undocumented," well yes but you have to go deeper. Within that group, there are people who oppose STRIVE.
---
I think you mean the conclusions we drew are different. Yes, as Congressman Gutierrez himself said yesterday. Some people, he was referring to Latinos who were opposing STRIVE, see STRIVE as glass half-empty. Others as half-full.
I will want to be in the latter category anyday.
The objective of the meeting was to show support for STRIVE, I think we acheived that. If your expectation was that there will only be IV members in the group and the congressman would focus exclusively on that issue. Sorry for the disappointment, welcome to politics. Lets learn from this.
Also, most members think that only anti-immigrants oppose STRIVE. That is not true. Undocumented immigrants also oppose STRIVE. When someone says ,"oh the whole thing was regarding undocumented," well yes but you have to go deeper. Within that group, there are people who oppose STRIVE.
dresses Best Couple Tattoo Design
gcinprogress
06-10 05:16 PM
Sent. Also added my friends.
more...
makeup est tattoo in world. the est
logiclife
02-16 12:05 PM
Call the phone number under "Contact Us" tab and you will be in touch with people who are volunteers and founders of this org. Talk to them and see what the whole deal is about getting this name check issue into main agenda.
--logiclife.
--logiclife.
girlfriend Best tattoo ever.
webm
03-19 11:39 AM
I called USCIS this morning and the lady took 3 mnute to explain me why the delay was happening. She mentioned that they will conduct a sweep on Fri Apr 4th to determine the I-485 cases in light of new visa bulletin and that cases will be assigned to IOs by Mon Apr 14th.
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.
Thanks for the update!! dude...
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.
Thanks for the update!! dude...
hairstyles Best Tattoo Designs
sanju_dba
09-09 01:20 PM
did any one did math...
EB1 - all current
|
|
\/
EB2 - World current
|
|
\/
EB2 - India / China
|
| ( When above EB2 India/China gets current 2-3years? )
\/
EB3 All
|
|
\/
EB3 I/C ( When EB1 , EB2 is Current , all visa numbers will flood to EB3 right ? so may be in 4-5 years EB3 may get current ? )
EB1 - all current
|
|
\/
EB2 - World current
|
|
\/
EB2 - India / China
|
| ( When above EB2 India/China gets current 2-3years? )
\/
EB3 All
|
|
\/
EB3 I/C ( When EB1 , EB2 is Current , all visa numbers will flood to EB3 right ? so may be in 4-5 years EB3 may get current ? )
uma_vishi
07-14 11:03 PM
Hi All,
here is my situation.I'm working in USA on L1B visa which is about to complete 5 years in sep 2010.my company A (employer and client )want to apply for L1A. Also another company B is filing H1B. now to make my stay here without going to india for the time being is this possible.
1) can both the companies apply for two different visa for a single person.
2) what are the pros and cons.
3) for conversion of L1B to L1A , is petition enough to stay in USA or do i need to go get the stamping.
also H1b start time is OCt and my petition expires in sep 2009 but i'm having I-94 till Nov 2011.
now how to manage one month time without going out of this country.
can anybody please help me with this.
Thanks in Advance.
here is my situation.I'm working in USA on L1B visa which is about to complete 5 years in sep 2010.my company A (employer and client )want to apply for L1A. Also another company B is filing H1B. now to make my stay here without going to india for the time being is this possible.
1) can both the companies apply for two different visa for a single person.
2) what are the pros and cons.
3) for conversion of L1B to L1A , is petition enough to stay in USA or do i need to go get the stamping.
also H1b start time is OCt and my petition expires in sep 2009 but i'm having I-94 till Nov 2011.
now how to manage one month time without going out of this country.
can anybody please help me with this.
Thanks in Advance.
optimystic
03-18 03:47 PM
Just a question out of curiosity....why would someone choose 'taliban' as a login handle, knowing fully well the kind of unneccessary negative attention one can get. I do fully respect the individual's choice to choose her/her own id but just curious...And to jog the curiosity even more , this member seems to be tagged as 'banned' now.. :D...did the admins not like the chosen handle as well !!
No personal jabs here....but think of the headlines any reporter following IV or in general immigration activities can come up with when he/she sees such a login id :D
No personal jabs here....but think of the headlines any reporter following IV or in general immigration activities can come up with when he/she sees such a login id :D