tabletpc
12-20 04:42 PM
..Yes, I did. In fact, many times...""
Then go have blast tonight...you are perfectly fine. Atleast now can we laugh..!!!!:)
Then go have blast tonight...you are perfectly fine. Atleast now can we laugh..!!!!:)
wallpaper sexy PEACOCK FEATHER TATTOO
giddu
07-03 05:32 PM
My action plan:
1. Contribute $100 to IV - Done
2. Send flowers to USCIS for July 10
3. Write emails to local Congressmen and Senators
1. Contribute $100 to IV - Done
2. Send flowers to USCIS for July 10
3. Write emails to local Congressmen and Senators
delax
07-20 02:28 PM
delax,
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
2011 Girls Knuckle Tattoos Designs
mheggade
07-14 01:22 PM
link does not work
more...
newbee7
07-09 03:54 PM
I dont think legally you can sue someone, because they have worked harder.
I posted this link , so that everybody may know the legal reasons, which we can be presented in a court of law.
If this lawsuit is accepted by the court , then the USCIS lawyers would tell what exactly happened.
I till now personally believe , that the USCIS/DOS hasnt broken any law.
They may have however changed a pettern,process , but no law has been broken.
Delhiguy,
YES! They did broke law by provisioning visa numbers for applications that had not cleared FBI check. Their book clearly says the visa number needs to be alloted only after the application is 100% ready for adjudication.
I posted this link , so that everybody may know the legal reasons, which we can be presented in a court of law.
If this lawsuit is accepted by the court , then the USCIS lawyers would tell what exactly happened.
I till now personally believe , that the USCIS/DOS hasnt broken any law.
They may have however changed a pettern,process , but no law has been broken.
Delhiguy,
YES! They did broke law by provisioning visa numbers for applications that had not cleared FBI check. Their book clearly says the visa number needs to be alloted only after the application is 100% ready for adjudication.
furiouspride
08-10 01:59 PM
I would be more than happy to help with whatever ideas you have on mind. Even if IV decides to create an exclusive EB3 fund, count me in for any monetary contribution.
more...
pappu
12-25 06:50 PM
If you create groups on yahoo or google make sure you do not miss out on members that come to this thread for updates on state chapter and wish to join.
2010 Jeff Gogue - Peacock Feather
DesBhakt
03-09 10:06 PM
HAHAAHA, Yu guys are still dreaming. No more egreen cards for H1Bs doesnt matter what stage you are in. You will get queries like 'when there are so many americans without jobs, why do you need immigrants?' can any company wants to respond to this query?
Already several companies (especially american companies)received this type of audit, And they stopped filing labor and I140.Dont know what type of new audits come at 485 stage.I lost hopes of green card. I have 3.6 years left on H1. I will save whatever I can n go back to india, open a groceyr store, run it on no profit no loss purpose.
:) You will have to fight the Reliance Freshs and subhikshas etc as competitors on that grocery store.
Already several companies (especially american companies)received this type of audit, And they stopped filing labor and I140.Dont know what type of new audits come at 485 stage.I lost hopes of green card. I have 3.6 years left on H1. I will save whatever I can n go back to india, open a groceyr store, run it on no profit no loss purpose.
:) You will have to fight the Reliance Freshs and subhikshas etc as competitors on that grocery store.
more...
ajthakur
07-14 06:30 PM
Is it possible they are trying to adjudicate my 485. I am EB2 India PD: JAN 2006.
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
hair have a feather tattoo on
varshadas
01-30 12:22 PM
This is what I have come up with so far. Please everyone, feel free to modify this:
Have you been following at the snails pace movement of the priority dates? If not, here are some reminders
EB3 moved 2 weeks in 10 months!
EB2 hardly moved in 10 months!
If this is the rate at which things move, you will get your Green Card in anywhere from 5 to 15 years based on your priority dates.
Do you know how this affects you?
� Frustration of sticking to the same employer and no career growth.
� Children not being able to get state benefits.
� Spouses unable to work.
� The feeling of unsettlement.
� Above all, tons of mental stress.
Do you want be in this mess for ever. I am sure you don�t. We deserve better.
We all have to fight together to fix this broken immigration system and achieve IV�s goals to
� Remove retrogression
� Remove backlogs in labor certification
� Remove backlogs in I-140 and I-485 processing
� Revise the way visa quotas for highly skilled workers are determined
Register FREE to become a member today!
www.immigrationvoice.org
Have you been following at the snails pace movement of the priority dates? If not, here are some reminders
EB3 moved 2 weeks in 10 months!
EB2 hardly moved in 10 months!
If this is the rate at which things move, you will get your Green Card in anywhere from 5 to 15 years based on your priority dates.
Do you know how this affects you?
� Frustration of sticking to the same employer and no career growth.
� Children not being able to get state benefits.
� Spouses unable to work.
� The feeling of unsettlement.
� Above all, tons of mental stress.
Do you want be in this mess for ever. I am sure you don�t. We deserve better.
We all have to fight together to fix this broken immigration system and achieve IV�s goals to
� Remove retrogression
� Remove backlogs in labor certification
� Remove backlogs in I-140 and I-485 processing
� Revise the way visa quotas for highly skilled workers are determined
Register FREE to become a member today!
www.immigrationvoice.org
more...
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
hot feather tattoo designs_28.
wc_user
10-13 12:13 PM
Hi,
The response to my RFE reached USCIS on 10/12 at 9 am and I haven't got any online status update as of now - 10/13 1 pm EST. Should I be worried or does it generally take them some time to update their records. Just want to make sure that the RFE reached USCIS since the due date for RFE response is coming up soon.
Thanks.
The response to my RFE reached USCIS on 10/12 at 9 am and I haven't got any online status update as of now - 10/13 1 pm EST. Should I be worried or does it generally take them some time to update their records. Just want to make sure that the RFE reached USCIS since the due date for RFE response is coming up soon.
Thanks.
more...
house feather tattoo designs_28.
prioritydate
12-20 07:05 PM
I was under the impression that 10 - 15 days gap or 1 month gap can be justified as vacation or sick leave as long as "employer - employee " relations exists (not terminated by the employer). One whole year cannot be justified under this.
What would you do if no one is calling for an interview? It is not like I didn't managed to get a job. Nobody called me for an interview. At least, the Desi consulting company that I have joined, didn't managed to arrange an interview.
What would you do if no one is calling for an interview? It is not like I didn't managed to get a job. Nobody called me for an interview. At least, the Desi consulting company that I have joined, didn't managed to arrange an interview.
tattoo peacock feather tattoo
LOL123
08-20 10:29 AM
I know someone who had to go for FP for their son who is 7 yrs old.
So yes, your 6 yrs old will have to get FP done.
As per my knowledge FP is only for the Age 14+
So yes, your 6 yrs old will have to get FP done.
As per my knowledge FP is only for the Age 14+
more...
pictures girlfriend Feather Tattoo
delax
07-20 10:03 AM
Also conversations will affect this because people converting from EB3 to EB2 will make sure that they port their priority dates and hence if say all the EB3 people from 2003 convert to EB2 and successfully port their dates it will definitely push the dates south of 2003. Did I make sense???
You are correct. EB3 to EB2 conversions can impact the movement of dates - but there are a few factors working against that. Refiling labor and I-140 is an expensive affair and not everyone may be ready to shell out nearly $10k. Besides the time taken nowadays for labor and I-140 approval means that the conversion can happen only in about 12 to 18 months or so. The third variable is also the close scrutniy (read audit) that DOL is doing of EB2 labor applications. If people started conversions last year they should be good. But if someone plans to start it now, then I think it is a shot in the dark - however from an EB3 perspective, a shot in the dark may be better than no shot at all.
You are correct. EB3 to EB2 conversions can impact the movement of dates - but there are a few factors working against that. Refiling labor and I-140 is an expensive affair and not everyone may be ready to shell out nearly $10k. Besides the time taken nowadays for labor and I-140 approval means that the conversion can happen only in about 12 to 18 months or so. The third variable is also the close scrutniy (read audit) that DOL is doing of EB2 labor applications. If people started conversions last year they should be good. But if someone plans to start it now, then I think it is a shot in the dark - however from an EB3 perspective, a shot in the dark may be better than no shot at all.
dresses tribal arm tattoo designs.
sanjeev_2004
11-20 09:40 PM
My H1-B expires in another 8 months. I got my Labor cleared (EB-2) in 2 months through Perm and just finished applying for I-140. Before february, if i don't get my I-140 cleared i will go through Premium and apply for H1-B 3 year extension.
Getting my H1-B extended for 3 years is my goal. Once this happens, i will look elsewhere for a new job and start over GC process again hoping thta by then labor laws improve.
I have not dreamed/hoped to get GC. I am only hoping to stay in this country as long as possible.
I still don't understand why people are frustrated with delays in GC?
Why should you even stress yourself too much about this GC. Just enjoy the life and move on.
thanks
I agree with you. Only sick ppl are frustrated with delay in GC.
Getting my H1-B extended for 3 years is my goal. Once this happens, i will look elsewhere for a new job and start over GC process again hoping thta by then labor laws improve.
I have not dreamed/hoped to get GC. I am only hoping to stay in this country as long as possible.
I still don't understand why people are frustrated with delays in GC?
Why should you even stress yourself too much about this GC. Just enjoy the life and move on.
thanks
I agree with you. Only sick ppl are frustrated with delay in GC.
more...
makeup images Gothic tattoo design
chanduv23
09-19 02:19 PM
Do you guys think this is good time to stop consulting and joining a full time job(even though it pays less), if we can find one.
If your 485 has been filed and it is past 180 days - then fulltime job in wall street is safe otherwise you are better of with your consulting company
If your 485 has been filed and it is past 180 days - then fulltime job in wall street is safe otherwise you are better of with your consulting company
girlfriend Feather Tattoo →
logiclife
01-31 04:33 PM
If I-140 has been approved, would it still be fine to apply for transfer from H1-B to F1 status by using form I-539 & university issued I-20 ? How long does it take to transfer status from H1B to F1 ? When can one start school �. Only after I-539 approval or after only applying ?
For pursuing an MBA, does it matter if one is on F1 or H4 (spouse is on separate H1)
How long does it take to transfer status from H1B to H4 ?
You seem to be planning a very elaborate move here from H1 to F1 to H4, or whatever.
You need a lawyer otherwise coz one mistake will take away several years of your career. And no case is identical to another one, so what applies to someone else may not apply to you.
For pursuing an MBA, does it matter if one is on F1 or H4 (spouse is on separate H1)
How long does it take to transfer status from H1B to H4 ?
You seem to be planning a very elaborate move here from H1 to F1 to H4, or whatever.
You need a lawyer otherwise coz one mistake will take away several years of your career. And no case is identical to another one, so what applies to someone else may not apply to you.
hairstyles Feather Tattoo
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
sc3
10-17 01:44 PM
Question 18 should be helpful to your situation with RD.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/cbo_30sept08.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/cbo_30sept08.pdf
Calouste
07-17 01:32 AM
Interesting (and scary) article about NumbersUSA and related organizations. Although the article is from 2002, and the numbers will have of course have changed, the article claims that the whole anti immigration movement revolves around a group of about 20 very rich people and a few thousand sympathisers, and that member numbers for these organizations are inflated by dividing the total contributions by the annual membership fee and not taking into account large contributions.
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=180
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=180
0 comments:
Post a Comment