webm
09-26 10:12 AM
I sent a message to editor!!!
wallpaper her hands over her mouth,
svr_76
07-29 11:51 AM
Filing H1 and GC(Perm) are 2 different problems. H1 is temporarily hiring a skilled resource whereas GC is the intent to sponser for permanent immigration. And hence PERM processing is more involved.
Big corporation, which have to maintain accurate HR job descriptions/codes etc find that during PERM advertisement, they do find qualified applicants. At that point they cannot continue the process. This "recruitment" process is the most costly of the entire GC process and if they "find/receive" applications from qualified citizens/GC holders/Or ppl who dont need sponsership (read EAD) then they have to stop that process....
So saying that we will do GC is fine..but the current ground realities are different. You can get GC done from Desi consultant bcos the skirt the whole issue and "make" up the job requirement they want..well (read hell) they will even run fake pay stubs for u...so they can do wonders.
Big corporation, which have to maintain accurate HR job descriptions/codes etc find that during PERM advertisement, they do find qualified applicants. At that point they cannot continue the process. This "recruitment" process is the most costly of the entire GC process and if they "find/receive" applications from qualified citizens/GC holders/Or ppl who dont need sponsership (read EAD) then they have to stop that process....
So saying that we will do GC is fine..but the current ground realities are different. You can get GC done from Desi consultant bcos the skirt the whole issue and "make" up the job requirement they want..well (read hell) they will even run fake pay stubs for u...so they can do wonders.
amitjoey
01-18 12:32 PM
http://www..com/discussion-forums/dallas-backlog/1171607/#post-6787022
This is what I found from other web site when I tried to get more membership to IV. These are the comments I received for the IV. How can we make people aware of our good faith effort. This is another road block we are facing. Many people will not believe that our efforts in full good faith. IV needs to put more emphasis on these issues also.
Just opinions.
Thanks
Every time you stand out of the crowds, you will have to bear rotten eggs and tomatoes. This is no different. Anytime you do the right thing, there will be critics. Remember all of the people out there (Anti-Immigrants) who do not want IV to succeed.
This is what I found from other web site when I tried to get more membership to IV. These are the comments I received for the IV. How can we make people aware of our good faith effort. This is another road block we are facing. Many people will not believe that our efforts in full good faith. IV needs to put more emphasis on these issues also.
Just opinions.
Thanks
Every time you stand out of the crowds, you will have to bear rotten eggs and tomatoes. This is no different. Anytime you do the right thing, there will be critics. Remember all of the people out there (Anti-Immigrants) who do not want IV to succeed.
2011 A circle of stick figures hold
nk2007
07-18 12:34 PM
Some of you have been concerned about my post regarding the rejection of some applications received on July 2nd. I've been checking and it seems to be true that some cases were sent back that day. Apparently, the number of cases sent back is small, however, so that is good news. And you should have received the case back by now if you're in that group. For everyone else, the way you will likely find that your case is being processed will be if the check is cashed. I would give this a few days and keep checking with the bank to see if the payment has cleared and this will be a lot faster in all likelihood than waiting on a receipt. Obviously, check with your lawyer on this.
more...
ndbhatt
06-10 08:19 PM
Guys,
Don't fire up on my comments given below.
I agree that ALL of us irrespective of EB category will be impacted if this proposed bill becomes a law.
Just step back and think for a minute, what is the impact on the US companies due to inability of his bright workers to continue working in US? Will US businesses sit tight without raising any concerns? No way...
This is just an eyewash to get political mileage. No matter what degree of love-hate relationship exists between voters and politicians. Certainly, political power cannot, and never will, have a brazen bill such as this, that will hurt American economy more than anything.
Let's assume for a moment that hypothetically this becomes law...
What will we do? Some of common options:
- Move to immigrant friendly country, OR
- Return to mother land, OR
- Company will move its operation, and you, to continue its operations, OR
- look at alternate legal ways to stay in this country until situation changes, OR
- Become undocumented alien :D
Guys, we still have options but US of A has too much at stake to make this text into a law.
Please don't get me wrong, I am in the same boat as all of you. It's just my 2 cents.
bhattji
Don't fire up on my comments given below.
I agree that ALL of us irrespective of EB category will be impacted if this proposed bill becomes a law.
Just step back and think for a minute, what is the impact on the US companies due to inability of his bright workers to continue working in US? Will US businesses sit tight without raising any concerns? No way...
This is just an eyewash to get political mileage. No matter what degree of love-hate relationship exists between voters and politicians. Certainly, political power cannot, and never will, have a brazen bill such as this, that will hurt American economy more than anything.
Let's assume for a moment that hypothetically this becomes law...
What will we do? Some of common options:
- Move to immigrant friendly country, OR
- Return to mother land, OR
- Company will move its operation, and you, to continue its operations, OR
- look at alternate legal ways to stay in this country until situation changes, OR
- Become undocumented alien :D
Guys, we still have options but US of A has too much at stake to make this text into a law.
Please don't get me wrong, I am in the same boat as all of you. It's just my 2 cents.
bhattji
Desertfox
10-29 08:14 PM
EB3 India
PD July 06
I-140 Approved
485 Pending:D
PD July 06
I-140 Approved
485 Pending:D
more...
seahawks
06-10 05:49 PM
sent, also forwarded to friends.
2010 A circle of stick figures hold
zen
03-29 10:32 PM
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...
very good point and I agree 100 percent ..sad part is that such a good post gets buried under 20 posts which ask for more donations.
as far as I know FOIA campaign was for 5000 dollars ..then it was increased to 10,000. will it increase again ?
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...
very good point and I agree 100 percent ..sad part is that such a good post gets buried under 20 posts which ask for more donations.
as far as I know FOIA campaign was for 5000 dollars ..then it was increased to 10,000. will it increase again ?
more...
gandalf_gray
06-08 11:36 PM
Here is what I would do:
- Fast track the H-1B application using premium processing so that you know for sure whether you have it or not.
- If they approve your petition, it will have a start date of Oct 1. Since your L1 is expiring in Sept, they will not approve the change of status. So, you will get the approval notice without the attached I-94.
- Once you have the approval notice in hand, set up an appointment for your H-1B visa in your home country. Leave the country before your L1 I-94 expires.
- Get the H-1B visa and come back in Oct to work for your new employer.
If you decide to do the L1 extension now, then you get into issues of which petition was approved last by the USCIS - last action rule. Keep it straightforward with minimal complications so that your future applications, such as GC, are also less complicated.
Also, a word to the wise - make sure you are not unpaid/on bench, no nonsensical bonds etc. when you come in on H-1. These things create unnecessary complications in the future.
Thanks AMGC. need one clarification.
do you mean to say that because my L1 is expiring in September, the COS will not be allowed, but the H1 itself will be approved ?
or will it be like because L1 expires before Oct1, the entire h1B petiton will be rejected outright ?
I have this thread on this topic.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=253917
- Fast track the H-1B application using premium processing so that you know for sure whether you have it or not.
- If they approve your petition, it will have a start date of Oct 1. Since your L1 is expiring in Sept, they will not approve the change of status. So, you will get the approval notice without the attached I-94.
- Once you have the approval notice in hand, set up an appointment for your H-1B visa in your home country. Leave the country before your L1 I-94 expires.
- Get the H-1B visa and come back in Oct to work for your new employer.
If you decide to do the L1 extension now, then you get into issues of which petition was approved last by the USCIS - last action rule. Keep it straightforward with minimal complications so that your future applications, such as GC, are also less complicated.
Also, a word to the wise - make sure you are not unpaid/on bench, no nonsensical bonds etc. when you come in on H-1. These things create unnecessary complications in the future.
Thanks AMGC. need one clarification.
do you mean to say that because my L1 is expiring in September, the COS will not be allowed, but the H1 itself will be approved ?
or will it be like because L1 expires before Oct1, the entire h1B petiton will be rejected outright ?
I have this thread on this topic.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=253917
hair stick people holding hands
gene77
03-17 01:54 PM
Category: EB3 India
PD: Oct 2004
140 Approved
485 Applied July 07 and pending.
PD: Oct 2004
140 Approved
485 Applied July 07 and pending.
more...
paskal
01-18 09:55 PM
just sent it to you
wasn't sure i could put a file here
wasn't sure i could put a file here
hot stick people holding hands
senthil1
06-13 02:08 PM
If the restrictions in H1b comes then I may be impacted also many of my friends and relatives may be impacted. For our personal lives H1b and green card are important if we want to stay in USA. My point is if congress make sure that if I or you will not take any eligible US persons job in USA that is acceptable for me. That will make sure everyone happy
Anyhow we will see what next for CIR and we will do more analysis when it comes.
Senthil1, Pineapple
Please let us not sound harsh and have a bipartisan :D discussion. It is just my statement I do not disagree with neither of you.
Rule 2
You mean Microsoft and Google and other companies want to stop outsourcing. They would not have build a huge team in india if they wanted to do this. The point that you are missing is that they need H1-Bs here because no american born is availabe here to fill those positions.
Read my statement thoroughly.
Big consulting companies(Bearing point....my list will go on) that are plenty in the US who hire and fire H1-B and american born if they cannot find another client for them after few days.
What will happen to these companies .. they have to shut down
Rule 2 will be a disaster for all these companies.
These companies do not go to india to get H1-B's they get them when they come here brought by india Desi companies.
It will be a mess. You might be talking about one company that will never displace and american and will garauntee an employee that he will never be fired once hired : Give me a break.
Anyhow we will see what next for CIR and we will do more analysis when it comes.
Senthil1, Pineapple
Please let us not sound harsh and have a bipartisan :D discussion. It is just my statement I do not disagree with neither of you.
Rule 2
You mean Microsoft and Google and other companies want to stop outsourcing. They would not have build a huge team in india if they wanted to do this. The point that you are missing is that they need H1-Bs here because no american born is availabe here to fill those positions.
Read my statement thoroughly.
Big consulting companies(Bearing point....my list will go on) that are plenty in the US who hire and fire H1-B and american born if they cannot find another client for them after few days.
What will happen to these companies .. they have to shut down
Rule 2 will be a disaster for all these companies.
These companies do not go to india to get H1-B's they get them when they come here brought by india Desi companies.
It will be a mess. You might be talking about one company that will never displace and american and will garauntee an employee that he will never be fired once hired : Give me a break.
more...
house hairstyles hold hands around
snathan
08-10 12:50 PM
Thanks VDLRAO.
I looked at 2008 data from same source and surprised to see 70046 approvals for 2008-EB2.
Does that means there are not many old cases in line ahead of us?
Source link: DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2008 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm)
check for table 6
That means EB2 India/China will see drastic movement this year....may be to end or 2007 or 2008?
I looked at 2008 data from same source and surprised to see 70046 approvals for 2008-EB2.
Does that means there are not many old cases in line ahead of us?
Source link: DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2008 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm)
check for table 6
That means EB2 India/China will see drastic movement this year....may be to end or 2007 or 2008?
tattoo stick people holding hands
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.
more...
pictures How To Draw People Holding
ItalySeAaTapki
07-11 02:05 PM
It is same as July07 VB Fiasco. An Error.
Either they will retract or will allow all the people to file I 485 and will issue GC after taking own sweet time.
Unless those 3 bills pass, not much hope.
Either they will retract or will allow all the people to file I 485 and will issue GC after taking own sweet time.
Unless those 3 bills pass, not much hope.
dresses stick people holding hands
h1techSlave
03-17 02:04 PM
Including spillover generally EB3-I clears up around 5000 visas per year on average ( Though theoratically stuck at 3300-3500). 3 visas per applicant is at bit high end. I would not assume everybody is married AND have child.. I would put that around 1.75. But, yes, even if select these new parameters than also it would take years..Theoratically, ofcourse:):)
Based on your assumptions, it would take around 2 years to reach Dec 2003 for EB3-India.
# of visas required = 5000 or 6000 * 1.75 = 8750 or 10, 500
# of visas available = 5000
# years of wait until Dec 2003 = 1.75 to 2.1 years.
Based on your assumptions, it would take around 2 years to reach Dec 2003 for EB3-India.
# of visas required = 5000 or 6000 * 1.75 = 8750 or 10, 500
# of visas available = 5000
# years of wait until Dec 2003 = 1.75 to 2.1 years.
more...
makeup stick people holding hands
jonty_11
07-09 06:36 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
girlfriend stick people holding hands
vik352
07-01 06:12 PM
We already called the local lawmakers. This online petition can have two columns, one for people who are suffering because of this per country quota and other for people who support the idea (Friends/relatives/coworkers). We can start the petition and we may generate 100K signatures.
mpadapa: We will let you have the 1000001th signature:)
mpadapa: We will let you have the 1000001th signature:)
hairstyles stick people holding hands
namecheck3yr
02-21 11:26 AM
I am trying to immigrate to this country. I feel that I have my own responsibility to make this country a better place. From my own experience, I know that the namecheck is the most ridiculous process, needs immediate fix:
1. What is the legal base? No legal base makes it become such a black hole.
2. No time frame, they can use �case by case�, �national security� as excuses to randomly delay your cases.
3. It�s a lottery, we can only pray, some people get it cleared in one month, some more than 3 yrs.
4. Case by case? We�ve got a lottery program. Where is the justice, the fairness? How should those affected people plan their living and become a productive citizen?
5. National security? You should not give those �terrorist suspects� more that 3 yrs of freedom! Should it be done earlier before they enter this country?
6. The 911 terrorist attacks did not directly affect most people, but name checking makes many people very anxious. They are amplifying the effect of the terrorist attacks and that is what the terrorist wants. What is the efficiency of this measure?
7. No transparency, nobody knows how they do it.
8. Not responsive, you cannot get any meaningful response except those excuses.
9. You are guilty first, you do not have any chance to provide any assistance to them, and they won�t request any either.
retrohatao willgetgc2005 wam4wam & stirGC,
Thank You for your input. This is very helpful to highlight the name check problem. The problem description and proposed solution by retrohatao are very good. However, just allow me to share a bigger picture. There is no difference between any issue is being categorized by someone to be a sub-issue or if an issue is categorized as main issue. What is important is that the issue is being addressed ....
willgetgc2005, just so that you know, I am also stuck in name check since June-04 and my 485 is pending since Oct-03. Just like you, this issue directly affects me. No doubt this is a very important issue. As berkeleybee mentioned, this is being addressed and communicated to the lawmakers and CA team did an excellent job in making the presentation to the lawmakers.
Even though name check delay issue directly affects people like you and me, know that this is not the only important issue. The point is, many people only care about getting to the next stage of GC process. If someone's labor is stuck, that group thinks that labor certification clearance should be the top priority. If someone's 140 got rejected, then that issue should be the only issue on IV's agenda. If someone is not able to apply for 485, then that person wants to make that as the top priority. If someone is a PHD, then that person wants the top agenda should be to get GC to the guy who has PHD and the argument presented to us is - don't you get it, I am a "PHD". The other day there was a group of people including techworker_tn1, helpful_leo etc who wanted to form their own group for PHDs. And now, if someone's name check is delayed, then we say that everybody will have to go through it sometime in the later stage, so this issue should be on the fore-front of the list of issues.
I am slightly perplexed by the behavior of some members who seems to indicate that we are in some sort of race with one another. And these members seem to send out a message that says - if their issue is not listed as top priority goal then all other issues that IV is working to resolve or all the work being done by IV is worthless. I am slightly disturbed to read posts like the one from wam4wam which says that he/she hopes that bill is not passed till his/her name check is cleared.
This is a sincere request to everybody. If all that we think about is 'what's in it for me', then we cannot find commonality among ourselves. And thus no progress is possible. Know that with this thought process, nothing will happen.
IV is an organization made by people like you and me. If everybody's objective is to get to the next stage of green card process, know that we are not behaving like matured and "educated" class that we all claim to belong. Just reaching the next stage of the process is something like looking for instant gratification which actually doesn't help the cause or the complete green card process.
Most humbly, I would like to request you to post your experiences with how many people you have communicated about the efforts of IV? How many people you have convinced to join IV? What is the success rate? Were you able to persuade the people to contribute for this cause? Those things will help more than anything else. If IV is bigger and stronger, we can together address each and every issue. Ask yourself, how is it possible to continue to include more agendas and not come up with more helping hands and more resources and expect to succeed?
If you do not see a favorable post or see a post that doesn't contain something that you want to hear, please do not infer that nobody cares or as if no one is doing anything. That post may just express somebody's opinion. I must mention that everybody wants their agenda to be pushed to the top. If there is some sort of a debate from others in the forum, I see that group of people starts backing off and starts posting messages to communicate as if this forum or IV is not doing what it should; Or some people start posting messageas hoping that bill will not pass if their agenda is not addressed.....and on and on. Please let me share that this doesn't help anybody.
retrohato, Would you like to take the lead on making name check to the forefront and address it in every possible manner? IV needs sincere people like you who can spend time to do each task. We have very good ideas on how to approach this issue and find a solution to this issue. If you could please take the lead on this issue, know that name check is top priority of IV. I would request you to please call us at anytime convenient for you and express that you would like to work on this issue. We need people who are ready to take ownership of issues and are ready to deliver. Would you like to join this effort actively?
Just so that everybody know, Immigration Voice could include 'World Peace' as one of the agenda items. But just including something as Goal doesn't mean that it can be achieved. To achieve anything that is listed as goals or to meaningfully add anything to the goals we need more serious people and more resources. If you are interested to actively contribute, please call us and we will connect you to the larger group of people to team-up the work for this issue. It is ok if you are not able to participate actively. It would help if you could please encourage others to take up the responsibility. Just because people are not agreeing with you, posting negative or discouraging messages will not help anybody.
America is a great nation. That is why we want to stay here and want our GC sooner. JFK once said that 'Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country'. One of the reasons why America is Great is because of the people of this great nation delivered what JFK said. We all could learn from this and before making any claim to being part of the American fabric or before claiming to be from "educated" class, maybe we need to stop behaving in way that only sends out the message 'what's in it for me'.
1. What is the legal base? No legal base makes it become such a black hole.
2. No time frame, they can use �case by case�, �national security� as excuses to randomly delay your cases.
3. It�s a lottery, we can only pray, some people get it cleared in one month, some more than 3 yrs.
4. Case by case? We�ve got a lottery program. Where is the justice, the fairness? How should those affected people plan their living and become a productive citizen?
5. National security? You should not give those �terrorist suspects� more that 3 yrs of freedom! Should it be done earlier before they enter this country?
6. The 911 terrorist attacks did not directly affect most people, but name checking makes many people very anxious. They are amplifying the effect of the terrorist attacks and that is what the terrorist wants. What is the efficiency of this measure?
7. No transparency, nobody knows how they do it.
8. Not responsive, you cannot get any meaningful response except those excuses.
9. You are guilty first, you do not have any chance to provide any assistance to them, and they won�t request any either.
retrohatao willgetgc2005 wam4wam & stirGC,
Thank You for your input. This is very helpful to highlight the name check problem. The problem description and proposed solution by retrohatao are very good. However, just allow me to share a bigger picture. There is no difference between any issue is being categorized by someone to be a sub-issue or if an issue is categorized as main issue. What is important is that the issue is being addressed ....
willgetgc2005, just so that you know, I am also stuck in name check since June-04 and my 485 is pending since Oct-03. Just like you, this issue directly affects me. No doubt this is a very important issue. As berkeleybee mentioned, this is being addressed and communicated to the lawmakers and CA team did an excellent job in making the presentation to the lawmakers.
Even though name check delay issue directly affects people like you and me, know that this is not the only important issue. The point is, many people only care about getting to the next stage of GC process. If someone's labor is stuck, that group thinks that labor certification clearance should be the top priority. If someone's 140 got rejected, then that issue should be the only issue on IV's agenda. If someone is not able to apply for 485, then that person wants to make that as the top priority. If someone is a PHD, then that person wants the top agenda should be to get GC to the guy who has PHD and the argument presented to us is - don't you get it, I am a "PHD". The other day there was a group of people including techworker_tn1, helpful_leo etc who wanted to form their own group for PHDs. And now, if someone's name check is delayed, then we say that everybody will have to go through it sometime in the later stage, so this issue should be on the fore-front of the list of issues.
I am slightly perplexed by the behavior of some members who seems to indicate that we are in some sort of race with one another. And these members seem to send out a message that says - if their issue is not listed as top priority goal then all other issues that IV is working to resolve or all the work being done by IV is worthless. I am slightly disturbed to read posts like the one from wam4wam which says that he/she hopes that bill is not passed till his/her name check is cleared.
This is a sincere request to everybody. If all that we think about is 'what's in it for me', then we cannot find commonality among ourselves. And thus no progress is possible. Know that with this thought process, nothing will happen.
IV is an organization made by people like you and me. If everybody's objective is to get to the next stage of green card process, know that we are not behaving like matured and "educated" class that we all claim to belong. Just reaching the next stage of the process is something like looking for instant gratification which actually doesn't help the cause or the complete green card process.
Most humbly, I would like to request you to post your experiences with how many people you have communicated about the efforts of IV? How many people you have convinced to join IV? What is the success rate? Were you able to persuade the people to contribute for this cause? Those things will help more than anything else. If IV is bigger and stronger, we can together address each and every issue. Ask yourself, how is it possible to continue to include more agendas and not come up with more helping hands and more resources and expect to succeed?
If you do not see a favorable post or see a post that doesn't contain something that you want to hear, please do not infer that nobody cares or as if no one is doing anything. That post may just express somebody's opinion. I must mention that everybody wants their agenda to be pushed to the top. If there is some sort of a debate from others in the forum, I see that group of people starts backing off and starts posting messages to communicate as if this forum or IV is not doing what it should; Or some people start posting messageas hoping that bill will not pass if their agenda is not addressed.....and on and on. Please let me share that this doesn't help anybody.
retrohato, Would you like to take the lead on making name check to the forefront and address it in every possible manner? IV needs sincere people like you who can spend time to do each task. We have very good ideas on how to approach this issue and find a solution to this issue. If you could please take the lead on this issue, know that name check is top priority of IV. I would request you to please call us at anytime convenient for you and express that you would like to work on this issue. We need people who are ready to take ownership of issues and are ready to deliver. Would you like to join this effort actively?
Just so that everybody know, Immigration Voice could include 'World Peace' as one of the agenda items. But just including something as Goal doesn't mean that it can be achieved. To achieve anything that is listed as goals or to meaningfully add anything to the goals we need more serious people and more resources. If you are interested to actively contribute, please call us and we will connect you to the larger group of people to team-up the work for this issue. It is ok if you are not able to participate actively. It would help if you could please encourage others to take up the responsibility. Just because people are not agreeing with you, posting negative or discouraging messages will not help anybody.
America is a great nation. That is why we want to stay here and want our GC sooner. JFK once said that 'Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country'. One of the reasons why America is Great is because of the people of this great nation delivered what JFK said. We all could learn from this and before making any claim to being part of the American fabric or before claiming to be from "educated" class, maybe we need to stop behaving in way that only sends out the message 'what's in it for me'.
jonty_11
10-20 02:56 PM
Obama may be great...but we dont know...At least McCain has helped sponsor or vote in favor of EB bills in the past...So History on EB supports him more than Obama....
serg
07-01 09:46 PM
Who gave that guy the right to ask questions to IV Core rudely ? He is questioning as if he hired IV core for resolving this Crisis and asking for status update.
He/She crossed the line somehow.
Yep, go ahead and ask to delete all newcomers who've been here less then {insert # of days}, or who can't contribute, or just anyone who was waiting for promised update (thanks Pappu for update).
He/She crossed the line somehow.
Yep, go ahead and ask to delete all newcomers who've been here less then {insert # of days}, or who can't contribute, or just anyone who was waiting for promised update (thanks Pappu for update).
Post a Comment