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
wallpaper Curing Affluenza
satishku_2000
07-09 03:18 PM
Her PD is 2003 .. She has a reason to be pissed off ...
minimalist
04-03 09:59 PM
tens of people who come out and attack them on why they need money all the time. But they still go ahead and do it. The reason being for every 10 who ridicule the idea, there are 20 who support it.
I really admire the perseverance the core shows in moving forward.
If everything seems to be tied to donations, this is because everything needs money. You know ,keeping up this website needs money. Lobbying needs a lot of money. The other day, some one pulled the info from a public website and said 500,000$ have been already spent on lobbying. I am sure more than 90% is probably contributed y less than 5% of the members. I am not one of those 5% even remotely.
Ignore teli and Sanju. You donot need their express approval to move forward. You know why they pick on you ? Because tyou just come and expect to be welcomed as heroes for any idea you have. You need to earn those stripes, then people will follow you.
Tak one Idea. Do something with it. YOu may not get a positive result in the end , but your effort will be appreciated and people will be more receptive to your next idea.
o.k. ..I will first tell the issues which are preventing me from doing what you say.
whenever we/I come with ideas - some members come up with posts to attack and kill the idea. ( teli and sanju ..).
everything seems to be tied to donations ..but do people even think before parting with their money ?(it is their money and there is a saying for such attitude). some say donate for lobbying ... how much does that cost ? how much is needed ? no info is provided.
say we are raising 10K every month and say lobbying requires 500 K ...5 - 8 years will go just to reach that amount (by that time, some will say lobbying needs more money ) !!!
I really admire the perseverance the core shows in moving forward.
If everything seems to be tied to donations, this is because everything needs money. You know ,keeping up this website needs money. Lobbying needs a lot of money. The other day, some one pulled the info from a public website and said 500,000$ have been already spent on lobbying. I am sure more than 90% is probably contributed y less than 5% of the members. I am not one of those 5% even remotely.
Ignore teli and Sanju. You donot need their express approval to move forward. You know why they pick on you ? Because tyou just come and expect to be welcomed as heroes for any idea you have. You need to earn those stripes, then people will follow you.
Tak one Idea. Do something with it. YOu may not get a positive result in the end , but your effort will be appreciated and people will be more receptive to your next idea.
o.k. ..I will first tell the issues which are preventing me from doing what you say.
whenever we/I come with ideas - some members come up with posts to attack and kill the idea. ( teli and sanju ..).
everything seems to be tied to donations ..but do people even think before parting with their money ?(it is their money and there is a saying for such attitude). some say donate for lobbying ... how much does that cost ? how much is needed ? no info is provided.
say we are raising 10K every month and say lobbying requires 500 K ...5 - 8 years will go just to reach that amount (by that time, some will say lobbying needs more money ) !!!
2011 Affluenza Special Report: The
paulavijit
03-17 09:03 AM
Guy you are forgetting the 7% per country quota for issuing GC. Applicants from a particular country can only get 7% of the total GC available in a year.
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
more...
abracadabra102
02-09 04:45 PM
They wasted 580 EB3 India visas last year (2009).
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
A third of 7% is the upper limit for EB3 I. They can issue fewer Visas based on demand from other countries. Having said that, South Korea and Philippines got more than their fair share. There may be some reason for this.
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
A third of 7% is the upper limit for EB3 I. They can issue fewer Visas based on demand from other countries. Having said that, South Korea and Philippines got more than their fair share. There may be some reason for this.
newuser
03-12 08:34 AM
Disappointed and hope the bench sitters will start reaching out the law makers
more...
dollar500
08-14 09:38 PM
Its due...
although not much excitement anticipated....seeing all 'U' sucks
although not much excitement anticipated....seeing all 'U' sucks
2010 #39;Affluenza#39; breakfast with
gsc999
07-13 12:38 PM
Can members posting on this thread please explain to me why this thread is more visible than our San Jose rally thread.
Is this issue so important to you? If you have some spare time, help spread media awareness about this rally.
Other option is to go to this attorney's website and discuss it there.
Is this issue so important to you? If you have some spare time, help spread media awareness about this rally.
Other option is to go to this attorney's website and discuss it there.
more...
Macaca
09-26 11:06 AM
The email should have info so that recipient can verify that rally was for EB GC issues and not H1B issues.
Say rally was organized by IV.
Put link to IV so they can check IV agenda.
Put link to Washington Post/NY Times article that correctly reported the rally.
Say rally was organized by IV.
Put link to IV so they can check IV agenda.
Put link to Washington Post/NY Times article that correctly reported the rally.
hair Affluenza Interrupted: Stories
ivy55
01-16 08:17 PM
Contributing $20/month
more...
walking_dude
10-30 06:38 PM
Thanks for sending the FOIA letter. I don't get the not able to vote part! Every logged in IV member should be able to vote. Where you logged in?
I hope the 70 is not correct. I sent in the FOIA request (notarized) and also mobilized few of my friends. The number 70 is incorrect, because it does not allow me to vote there, otherwise I am sure it would be atleast 71.
I hope the 70 is not correct. I sent in the FOIA request (notarized) and also mobilized few of my friends. The number 70 is incorrect, because it does not allow me to vote there, otherwise I am sure it would be atleast 71.
hot Posted by The Affluenza Team
leo2606
12-20 04:30 PM
Did you travel outside of USA after that? I mean after 2001 when ever you got into Job?
Folks, I didn't worked for an year(2001) due to, you know what I am saying....
Now I am afraid that I would get an RFE because of that. Do you think that I need to worry about it? :(
Folks, I didn't worked for an year(2001) due to, you know what I am saying....
Now I am afraid that I would get an RFE because of that. Do you think that I need to worry about it? :(
more...
house Post image for AFFLUENZA:
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...
tattoo Teenage Affluenza. Teenage Affluenza. 4:14. Teenage Affluenza.
Springflower
10-25 11:32 AM
PD is March 2004 / EB3 India / I 140 Approved / 485 Pending
more...
pictures Books:
gcdreamer05
03-19 07:29 AM
This is the power of Immigration Voice. Not everyone has the knowledge of all these situations, so we need to gain knowledge from the past experience of others.
I am sure thread's like this will help a lot of people who have plans to join few Full Time Employees who promise but cannot keep it up.
Please continue to share...
I am sure thread's like this will help a lot of people who have plans to join few Full Time Employees who promise but cannot keep it up.
Please continue to share...
dresses Affluenza By Clive Hamilton
pointlesswait
03-18 01:32 PM
i dont think there is a hard and fast rule as who gets what of the spill overs..
USCIS makes it as.depending on the backlog..
so anyone planning to sue is wasting his time!
USCIS makes it as.depending on the backlog..
so anyone planning to sue is wasting his time!
more...
makeup most depressing ook in
dontcareanymore
08-10 03:04 PM
That means EB2 India/China will see drastic movement this year....may be to end or 2007 or 2008?
Wishful thinking ?:)
Wishful thinking ?:)
girlfriend Sustainable Futures Society
BharatPremi
03-17 02:03 PM
Are you saying EB3-India visa date will be set as Jan 2004 by USCIS some time soon? I thought they kept saying that EB3-India dates would move very slowly only. So from the current Oct 2001 to Jan 2004 is a very long and narrow road.
Applicants with PD before January First 2004 will mostly be current by December 2008 end. That is what I belive, USCIS will head towards. If it will not happen than do not kill me.:) Ultimately we all are in USCIS's lap..
Applicants with PD before January First 2004 will mostly be current by December 2008 end. That is what I belive, USCIS will head towards. If it will not happen than do not kill me.:) Ultimately we all are in USCIS's lap..
hairstyles I first heard of this ook
nixstor
07-05 12:47 PM
Lets stop this thread and core decide about this ( who are running IV )
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
Spciy thread?? This is not spicy. This is serious stuff. I am not the OP, but the subject of the thread might be spicy to some folks. This discussion has come so many times. Atleast now we see that we have equal number of people split on both sides.
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
Spciy thread?? This is not spicy. This is serious stuff. I am not the OP, but the subject of the thread might be spicy to some folks. This discussion has come so many times. Atleast now we see that we have equal number of people split on both sides.
immigrationmatters30
09-19 02:25 PM
What if 485 was not filed but have an approved 140? Economy is taking big hits on the all the consulting firms even the big ones.I know this because I work for one and I was told budget spending on IT is going to be really tight moving forward for another couple of years espcially in financial sector.
admin
02-04 03:45 PM
retrohatao,
We're asking for transparency and increase in efficiency in all of USCIS operations including Name Check.
We're asking for transparency and increase in efficiency in all of USCIS operations including Name Check.
Post a Comment