aquarianf
07-31 03:03 PM
I reviewed copy of I-485 packegae and found that attorney didn't include Employment letter with package. I filed in June I already received filing numbers.
When I asked attorney why it wasn't sent, her response was that there are around 15 people from company who filed in month of June/july and she didn't included EVL for all of them. Also there are around 8 people who got their GC in my company in last 2 years and she didn't included EVL for all of them.
When I asked attorney why it wasn't sent, her response was that there are around 15 people from company who filed in month of June/july and she didn't included EVL for all of them. Also there are around 8 people who got their GC in my company in last 2 years and she didn't included EVL for all of them.
wallpaper Bourbon Street Sign Posters
ganguteli
01-25 01:02 PM
Another good idea is to post about action items on sites like Trackiz. I did a search and did not find any posting of IV on that site in last 6 months. So either nobody posted or postings are deleted. We need to keep posting on all such sites because not everyone visits IV.
We neeed to spread the word.
We neeed to spread the word.
h1techSlave
03-22 10:42 AM
I have noticed that the % prior to Jan 2004 is a whopping 44.06. I have a bad feeling that this group (prior to Jan 2004) is growing. :eek:
2011 Orleans Street Signs in
rayoflight
06-11 03:17 PM
Pappu,
Is there a way to know the list of the states the mail was sent to. As you know it is very important for these mails going to all the 50 states in huge numbers.
Thanks,
Rayoflight
Is there a way to know the list of the states the mail was sent to. As you know it is very important for these mails going to all the 50 states in huge numbers.
Thanks,
Rayoflight
more...
ambrishmisra
04-11 01:49 PM
Thanks a lot... :)
gc_bulgaria
09-27 11:34 AM
Well - though white racists may oppose - anything related to economy and development does go through.
I personally think that if this proposal goes through - EU will be the next melting pot.
Racism is there everywhere, we find it in US also, even in India, you find caste system and inter state racism. With rising opportunities, such things may not really be visible especially in places where there are free zones.
Does anyone has more info on this?
Few more links:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6992670
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2007_01_23/japan/immigrant_worker_shortage.htm
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/07/188
I personally think that if this proposal goes through - EU will be the next melting pot.
Racism is there everywhere, we find it in US also, even in India, you find caste system and inter state racism. With rising opportunities, such things may not really be visible especially in places where there are free zones.
Does anyone has more info on this?
Few more links:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6992670
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2007_01_23/japan/immigrant_worker_shortage.htm
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/07/188
more...
javadeveloper
12-12 03:56 PM
No one has answered my question yet - If we are so "highly skilled", why no one is listening to us in this country.
They'll definitely listen , but It takes some time , may be 5,6 years
They'll listen to you in 1 year if you have "extraordinary ability(EB1)"
They'll definitely listen , but It takes some time , may be 5,6 years
They'll listen to you in 1 year if you have "extraordinary ability(EB1)"
2010 Bourbon Street sign.
vkannan
11-12 10:59 PM
WRONG.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
Well, No wonder why we still could not pass any bill in our favour, Keep fighting Dude, EB1 vs EB2 v EB3 v horozontal spill vs vertical spill vs etc etc etc., Keep fighting....you are a good samaritan......
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
Well, No wonder why we still could not pass any bill in our favour, Keep fighting Dude, EB1 vs EB2 v EB3 v horozontal spill vs vertical spill vs etc etc etc., Keep fighting....you are a good samaritan......
more...
kutra
03-06 10:06 AM
btw you are paranoid ..how can someone else do this for you ??
>So long as singhsa3's not pledging that I and my wife will buy our house #2 and house #3 only because USCIS gives us green cards
dude, i was being funny. which part of the smiley didn't you get?
why are you so scared :-D ..what happens if media watches the poll and how is this dirty linen ...it is a valid point ..and the main point is legal people have to wait for years and years to get the stupid card (and in the meanwhile keep on paying the lawyers fees) ..this is not dirty linen ...if you are not convinced then stay out of the way.
really I dont see any other options after the letter campaign ...unless some one else has a better idea !!
I have been resisting to get dragged into this, but I have to post! Not only are you incapable of understanding humor, but you are totally incompetent in understanding plain English.
I never wrote dirty linen is "writing the fact that we have to wait for years and years" or "having the poll" either. singhsa3 is trying his best to make a case that all of us who are "waiting for years and years" have the potential to buy houses, and therefore give us GCs. Dirty linen is when people like me and Pegasus503 offer our contrasting views (and get red-dotted by immature posters who cannot have a civil debate) AND the media thinks these IV folks are not even in agreement on this subject. This to me would be detrimental to singhsa3's efforts and thus I wrote let's not bicker/argue/wash dirty linen about whether we agree with singhsa3's idea or not.
As far as your advice "if you are not convinced then stay out of the way", take a cold shower, dude. I was the first to delete my post and asked others to do the same so this would benefit singhsa3's campaign. If your miniscule brain cannot fathom my posts, ignore them and help singhsa3 out instead. And yes, while you are growing up, do resist the urge to add those red-dots......that's not getting you your green card any faster.
>So long as singhsa3's not pledging that I and my wife will buy our house #2 and house #3 only because USCIS gives us green cards
dude, i was being funny. which part of the smiley didn't you get?
why are you so scared :-D ..what happens if media watches the poll and how is this dirty linen ...it is a valid point ..and the main point is legal people have to wait for years and years to get the stupid card (and in the meanwhile keep on paying the lawyers fees) ..this is not dirty linen ...if you are not convinced then stay out of the way.
really I dont see any other options after the letter campaign ...unless some one else has a better idea !!
I have been resisting to get dragged into this, but I have to post! Not only are you incapable of understanding humor, but you are totally incompetent in understanding plain English.
I never wrote dirty linen is "writing the fact that we have to wait for years and years" or "having the poll" either. singhsa3 is trying his best to make a case that all of us who are "waiting for years and years" have the potential to buy houses, and therefore give us GCs. Dirty linen is when people like me and Pegasus503 offer our contrasting views (and get red-dotted by immature posters who cannot have a civil debate) AND the media thinks these IV folks are not even in agreement on this subject. This to me would be detrimental to singhsa3's efforts and thus I wrote let's not bicker/argue/wash dirty linen about whether we agree with singhsa3's idea or not.
As far as your advice "if you are not convinced then stay out of the way", take a cold shower, dude. I was the first to delete my post and asked others to do the same so this would benefit singhsa3's campaign. If your miniscule brain cannot fathom my posts, ignore them and help singhsa3 out instead. And yes, while you are growing up, do resist the urge to add those red-dots......that's not getting you your green card any faster.
hair Bourbon Street Sign
singhsa3
07-18 09:54 AM
Please explain Greg's comment,
"We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing."
Shouldn't any application rejected on July 2nd have already reached our lawyer's office by now?
Also, if my appliction, filled on July 2nd,reached 11:34 AM CST, has not been returned yet, shouldn't we assume that it will be accepted?
"We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing."
Shouldn't any application rejected on July 2nd have already reached our lawyer's office by now?
Also, if my appliction, filled on July 2nd,reached 11:34 AM CST, has not been returned yet, shouldn't we assume that it will be accepted?
more...
reddymjm
09-10 12:58 PM
My PD is March 2010 EB2 so i'm not even in this race yet but help me in understanding one thing.
Was EB3 current in July 2007? If yes, I'm assuming atleast 95% EB3 folks have EAD and their spouse can work. The really big problem in post 2007 EB3.
Since dates were current in July 2007, Eb2 and Eb3 can atleast enjoy EAD/spouse working benefits. Why do ppl complain when they have EAD etc whose PD is before 2007.
Yes EB3 was in Jun 2003 in Jun 2007 bulliten and July 2007 all were Current. EB3 was in 2001 or so till May 2007 Bulliten. Most of them waited few years to file 485.
Was EB3 current in July 2007? If yes, I'm assuming atleast 95% EB3 folks have EAD and their spouse can work. The really big problem in post 2007 EB3.
Since dates were current in July 2007, Eb2 and Eb3 can atleast enjoy EAD/spouse working benefits. Why do ppl complain when they have EAD etc whose PD is before 2007.
Yes EB3 was in Jun 2003 in Jun 2007 bulliten and July 2007 all were Current. EB3 was in 2001 or so till May 2007 Bulliten. Most of them waited few years to file 485.
hot Review of Bourbon Street,
chanduv23
09-19 02:46 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.
Its going to be tough for everyone. Service industry is one such industry. try to avoid FT jobs in wall street.
Its going to be tough for everyone. Service industry is one such industry. try to avoid FT jobs in wall street.
more...
house New Orleans; Bourbon Street
surabhi
07-28 12:56 PM
The corporates know what they are doing. They want to create controversy and rake in sales.
I consider myself liberal as in live and let live. This depiction pushes envelope big time. Along with rights comes the responsibilites.
I guess the marketing honchos at this company couldnt care less
For those who hasnt seen the image, I tried attaching here. Not sure if it'd come thru.
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/lost-ipa.jpg
I consider myself liberal as in live and let live. This depiction pushes envelope big time. Along with rights comes the responsibilites.
I guess the marketing honchos at this company couldnt care less
For those who hasnt seen the image, I tried attaching here. Not sure if it'd come thru.
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/lost-ipa.jpg
tattoo A street sign in New Orleans#39;
quizzer
08-15 03:59 PM
Sep visa bulletin better than expected for EB2
more...
pictures stock photo : Old street sign
gc28262
03-03 06:01 PM
Why are we just looking for 3 year EAD. We need GC !
dresses New Orleans Bourbon Street
amitjoey
08-15 04:01 PM
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
That was expected.
That was expected.
more...
makeup Bourbon Street Sign and Lamp
immigrant2007
08-12 04:04 PM
not even 2002, it's just 01Jan2002, means only 2001.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
Such is our seriousness, the thread barely started it was at the bottom of the list just awaiting its natural death. Whereas the most meningless threads are at the top of the list. If people can not EB3 backlog seriously then i am sure they don't deserve any GCs.
EB2 person who applied for greencard in 2006 getting the GC wth the person who applied in EB2 - 2006.
This gap between EB2 and EB3 is keep on increasing....
EB2 move is in Months....EB3 move not even in Days...
I'm not against EB2... but just comparing.:(
Such is our seriousness, the thread barely started it was at the bottom of the list just awaiting its natural death. Whereas the most meningless threads are at the top of the list. If people can not EB3 backlog seriously then i am sure they don't deserve any GCs.
girlfriend Bourbon Street Sign
GCard_Dream
03-18 05:35 PM
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:
This is the post from Ron:
I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:
Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.
I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks
So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.
This is the post from Ron:
I have to confess error and make a correction. The AC21 legislation changed things far more that I suspected and changed the allocation process from what I had learned previously. In further corresondence with the Visa Office, I've learned that I was wrong about how numbers are moved from worldwide to single state allocations. The following is a direct quote:
Quote:
Employment First Preference example: Annual limit 40,000 - (expected) 25,000 ("rest of world") - 3,300 (China limit) - 3,300 (India limit) = 8,400 unused numbers. Those 8,400 numbers could be made available to China/India applicants without regard to their normal 3,300 per-country limit for that category. But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis, and in doing so making sure that the additional number use would not result in the Worldwide annual limit being exceeded. Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country.
I apologize for the confusion generated by my earlier remarks
So whatever said in the visa bulletin makes sense.
hairstyles Neon Survey: Bourbon Street
abcdefgh
01-17 08:17 AM
Pappu:
Can we post link to this thread some where on every page so that who ever visits IV sees this thread right away? May be in different color or in some way so that it stands out. It looks like this thread is lost among all other threads.
Can we post link to this thread some where on every page so that who ever visits IV sees this thread right away? May be in different color or in some way so that it stands out. It looks like this thread is lost among all other threads.
nixstor
07-04 08:56 PM
Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
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.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
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.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
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.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
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.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
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.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
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.
We all understand this and what you are saying, But What is in law is more important than OB's recommendations. First of all the office of OB might not have recommended to pass on any name checks. It might have advised to some how expedite them. More over, I dont think that they take the annual report seriously. We know how many times DOS officials and USCIS officials testify before congress. Why don't they tell congress that in order to clear backlogs
a) They need FBI to expedite name checks (they might have testified about this)
b) They need to recapture visa numbers (AFAIK, they never did this because your case is not pending unless you filed for AOS/485. We are not a part of the back log)
Their biggest problem now is if all of us file for 485, we will continue to be the back log for ever on the back of USCIS for ages to come unless recapture occurs. What ever be the number 200K or 700K, they simply dont want it.
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.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
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.
Understood, if they can clear 60K cases in 18 days, I doubt they will have any issues clearing them in 90 days. It goes back to the point of us becoming the biggest hump on USCIS
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.
I think we all agree that there was no need to make every category current given that we know how many will become eligible for 485 filing. How ever, The OB's office will be pretty pissed if they use him as the trump card. Also, I got the annual report from OB's office in email on Jun 12th 07. VB came out on 14th? What you are saying is USCIS has worked over night to analyze OB's report or they had access to OB's report 15-20 days ahead. Everything points to me that there was a lack of communication between the two agencies on an issue with huge stakes.
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.
We need to do both as the success is not guaranteed in either situation. I do not know if AILF will win the law suit. On the other side, Senators like Kennedy who control immigration issues will not give a damn in the current situation. If the issue gets to a point where USCIS & DOS officials testify before congress, the root problem will be solved. If we just win the lawsuit and get in, USCIS is only going to sulk us for 10 years in the name of security check.In the end, We should be able to portray the whole situation as if USCIS has been put in a ugly predicament to utilize visa numbers under the arcane laws. Bashing DOS & USCIS left and right now is not of any use in the long run.
kutra
03-05 06:26 PM
I think that everybody has the right to express their opinion.
Anything else is sensorship
good luck to all
That is true. But I would rather bicker/argue among ourselves in our closed community and not in front of the public. I withdrew my post because singhsa3 is inviting media and other outlets to view this poll. I see no good coming out of washing our dirty linen in public.
I am neither convinced by singhsa3's arguments and nor do I buy into the whole "potential-to-buy-houses" angle (and I got red-dotted for all my previous posts, but I don't care), but if he's willing to take the efforts because he believes in what he's doing, then I don't have to be the all-freedom-of-speech guy.
So long as singhsa3's not pledging that I and my wife will buy our house #2 and house #3 only because USCIS gives us green cards, I am fine with continuing with my life and work. :)
Anything else is sensorship
good luck to all
That is true. But I would rather bicker/argue among ourselves in our closed community and not in front of the public. I withdrew my post because singhsa3 is inviting media and other outlets to view this poll. I see no good coming out of washing our dirty linen in public.
I am neither convinced by singhsa3's arguments and nor do I buy into the whole "potential-to-buy-houses" angle (and I got red-dotted for all my previous posts, but I don't care), but if he's willing to take the efforts because he believes in what he's doing, then I don't have to be the all-freedom-of-speech guy.
So long as singhsa3's not pledging that I and my wife will buy our house #2 and house #3 only because USCIS gives us green cards, I am fine with continuing with my life and work. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment