tomchi007
02-21 05:12 PM
Pardon my ignorance and pls help me understand, how does PD impact the mass 485 applications sent July/August 2007?
I thought the PD is only relevant for being able to apply for 485 and didnt matter if your 485 application had been received. Am I wrong?
I thought the PD is only relevant for being able to apply for 485 and didnt matter if your 485 application had been received. Am I wrong?
wallpaper quotes and poems about life
Jaime
09-11 02:48 PM
Come on guys! Make up your minds and attend the rally! You still have time! We'll help you! LET'S GO!!! Let's make history!!!
.soulty
02-23 05:43 PM
well, people seems to have forgotten about this battle...originally the date was 3 weeks after start..
...anyway since grinch aint around, ill make a date based around his original suggestion: say about 2 weeks
10th March
...anyway since grinch aint around, ill make a date based around his original suggestion: say about 2 weeks
10th March
2011 quotes and poems about life
thecipher5
10-13 11:21 AM
feedfront, the receipt date on my I-485 receipt notice is October 5, 2007.
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Do you have attorney? It will be better if he/she write letter for status of the case. I had RFE in last year (around summer'09). My PD was current since Aug, but no change in the status or specific response (tried congressman, senator, SR). But, I got new RFE (medical report required) when my attorney contacted them. I don't know what triggered it, but my attorney contacted USCIS last (after I did not get any specific info from other sources).
You can write to USCIS director. Someone here in this forum wrote to director, when he did not get any progress on his SR.
What's your receipt date? I heard that they are using receipt date. I know couple of people (including myself) whose application was picked (or generated RFE) matched the pattern of receipt date not PD.
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Do you have attorney? It will be better if he/she write letter for status of the case. I had RFE in last year (around summer'09). My PD was current since Aug, but no change in the status or specific response (tried congressman, senator, SR). But, I got new RFE (medical report required) when my attorney contacted them. I don't know what triggered it, but my attorney contacted USCIS last (after I did not get any specific info from other sources).
You can write to USCIS director. Someone here in this forum wrote to director, when he did not get any progress on his SR.
What's your receipt date? I heard that they are using receipt date. I know couple of people (including myself) whose application was picked (or generated RFE) matched the pattern of receipt date not PD.
more...
-sayings--flowers--Asian--quotes--Love_large.jpg "Love poems; Love quotes; cute"){kind=tracking}
Indirant
02-20 09:12 PM
Hi Guys when are you meeting in Durga temple Let me know I can come with some of my friends
Sekar
Sekar
leoindiano
03-17 01:05 PM
As i said, eb3 to eb2 porting is not easy....Unless, there is very strong case, like applicant having US Masters degree but employer filed in EB3 for reasons they only know....
Read this story...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13810
Read this story...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13810
more...
gsc999
09-26 08:55 PM
Here's a classic example ..
If you look at the other threads on this forum you have people against the Durban bill coz it affects F-1 students . There is another section which is against Grassley coz it'll affect Consultants trying to get H1-B. I do understand Grassley's bill can have many implications and need to be opposed, but the focus still has to be towards alleviating the Employment based GC issues.
I don't think CNN is to be faulted that much coz IV itself has lost its focus towards Employment Based Green Cards. period. thats what is started out to be and needs to come back on that track instead of trying to act as a platform for all Legal Immigration issues.
Simply put IV is " EB-1/2/3- related org" ok..ok.. add in those millionaires who put in a million dollars for GC too.
---
Hi,
Thanks for your feedback:
"I don't think CNN is to be faulted that much coz IV itself has lost its focus towards Employment Based Green Cards."
Your comment doesn't make sense to me. Please explain.
If you look at the other threads on this forum you have people against the Durban bill coz it affects F-1 students . There is another section which is against Grassley coz it'll affect Consultants trying to get H1-B. I do understand Grassley's bill can have many implications and need to be opposed, but the focus still has to be towards alleviating the Employment based GC issues.
I don't think CNN is to be faulted that much coz IV itself has lost its focus towards Employment Based Green Cards. period. thats what is started out to be and needs to come back on that track instead of trying to act as a platform for all Legal Immigration issues.
Simply put IV is " EB-1/2/3- related org" ok..ok.. add in those millionaires who put in a million dollars for GC too.
---
Hi,
Thanks for your feedback:
"I don't think CNN is to be faulted that much coz IV itself has lost its focus towards Employment Based Green Cards."
Your comment doesn't make sense to me. Please explain.
2010 hot sad love quotes and poems.
go_guy123
10-05 09:49 PM
Guys,
Just an update..I quit the company and joined small consulting firm. Got the project, labor approved, h1b approved (filed in premium) and prewailing wage determination will be started from next week.damn, i should ve done this 4 yrs back. these guys r fast. Never join as fulltime employee if you dont have green card
Congratulations...did you get the client letter to satisfy the new Employer-Employee relationship requirement. Was your H1B approved for just the duration of the project.
Just an update..I quit the company and joined small consulting firm. Got the project, labor approved, h1b approved (filed in premium) and prewailing wage determination will be started from next week.damn, i should ve done this 4 yrs back. these guys r fast. Never join as fulltime employee if you dont have green card
Congratulations...did you get the client letter to satisfy the new Employer-Employee relationship requirement. Was your H1B approved for just the duration of the project.
more...
addsf345
11-07 07:24 PM
trying to revive this discussion. Its been more than 6 - 8 months, so what are the updates? Please share.
I am aspiring AC21 wannabe. Appreciate word of advice from those who have successfully used this option.
I am aspiring AC21 wannabe. Appreciate word of advice from those who have successfully used this option.
hair quotes and poems about life
jnraajan
03-17 05:00 PM
From the poll results for EB3 priority Dates, I think, I learned something. People waiting for Green Card Pre-PERM are way more than people Waiting POST-PERM. This is an approximate comparision(before Dec 2004 and after Dec 2004, though PERM started in Apr 2005.)
What I am trying to see is, Whether we can very little membership from people who started their GC process after Mar 2005. If that is the case, why those people are not joining IV? Believe it or not, They would also love to have their GC's right now. Something seems to be wrong. We should probably come up with some ways to target those people who are still waiting to file their I-485 or having their Labor Pending.
What do you all say?
What I am trying to see is, Whether we can very little membership from people who started their GC process after Mar 2005. If that is the case, why those people are not joining IV? Believe it or not, They would also love to have their GC's right now. Something seems to be wrong. We should probably come up with some ways to target those people who are still waiting to file their I-485 or having their Labor Pending.
What do you all say?
more...
ashwaghoshk
03-21 12:39 PM
I still dont see labor approvals after March1. I dont know where you r looking at,, Can you tell me which page your looking at?
I sent you a private message... check that url
I sent you a private message... check that url
hot Love poems; Love quotes; cute
Deaddocus
03-15 07:57 AM
Modern knights, :D *ducks*
more...
house poems and quotes about life
starscream
06-12 11:34 AM
Kyl: CIR can be finished in a few days
Sen. Kyl (R-Az), one of the architects of the Senate�s CIR announced today that the Senate CIR can be finished in a few days. On CNN this morning he mentioned that the Senate Republican leadership is crafting a few necessary amendments and will take them to the Majority Leader. It is expected that the Cantwell amendment, albeit in a revised form, will be one of the amendments. The NY Times has a similar report.
please post the link to the NYTimes report and also to the report which says Cantwell amendment will be included
Sen. Kyl (R-Az), one of the architects of the Senate�s CIR announced today that the Senate CIR can be finished in a few days. On CNN this morning he mentioned that the Senate Republican leadership is crafting a few necessary amendments and will take them to the Majority Leader. It is expected that the Cantwell amendment, albeit in a revised form, will be one of the amendments. The NY Times has a similar report.
please post the link to the NYTimes report and also to the report which says Cantwell amendment will be included
tattoo quotes and poems about life
neelu
12-13 12:17 AM
I'm with you - less talk and more action.
Also, members should all show support for all goals.
I am not in the I-485 stage but would certainly fax USCIS.
In the same way, members should fax DOL to clear up their backlogs.
the whole point of this forum is united action, so lets show support
Add one more member to this effort. I will support any effort to call/fax for both fixes to LC backlogs as well as provision to allow 485 filing without visa number availability.
At the same time, I do want to caution that we need to take measured steps, because USCIS and DOL though they are public service departments are unlike the congress which is a representative body of the people and so by definition there to 'hear' our problems and address them. In summary, DOL and USCIS might not be as receptive or even be irritated (might hurt our cause).
I would suggest that a group of say around 10-15 with a couple of core members (am not volunteering them here!) who have had both media exposure and well versed with the issues, meet these people at the top and seek explanations. But even as I write this, I doubt how much effect that kind of thing would have, unless we do this on a regular basis.
I know many of these suggestions are easier said than done, but better something said than none! :)
Also, members should all show support for all goals.
I am not in the I-485 stage but would certainly fax USCIS.
In the same way, members should fax DOL to clear up their backlogs.
the whole point of this forum is united action, so lets show support
Add one more member to this effort. I will support any effort to call/fax for both fixes to LC backlogs as well as provision to allow 485 filing without visa number availability.
At the same time, I do want to caution that we need to take measured steps, because USCIS and DOL though they are public service departments are unlike the congress which is a representative body of the people and so by definition there to 'hear' our problems and address them. In summary, DOL and USCIS might not be as receptive or even be irritated (might hurt our cause).
I would suggest that a group of say around 10-15 with a couple of core members (am not volunteering them here!) who have had both media exposure and well versed with the issues, meet these people at the top and seek explanations. But even as I write this, I doubt how much effect that kind of thing would have, unless we do this on a regular basis.
I know many of these suggestions are easier said than done, but better something said than none! :)
more...
pictures quotes and poems about life
imh1b
11-12 03:21 PM
To the original poster of this thread: Why don't you go to court first.
I am sure after few days of visa bulletin, his anger will fizzle out and all these people talking about action will disappear.
I am sure after few days of visa bulletin, his anger will fizzle out and all these people talking about action will disappear.
dresses quotes and poems about life
sanju
02-07 01:25 PM
I support country quota otherwise all the greencards will be taken by Indians and Chinese and the people from small countries will not even get a chance. I am sorry but of you are born on one of these countries then you have to wait before everyone who filed earlier.
If country quotas are removed in employment based category, skilled immigrants from other countries will get EQUAL chance just as skilled immigrants from India and China.
Here is a problem arising as the result of country quotas -
1.) Huge backlogs in EB green card categories
2.) Consulting companies apply for H1 for more and more people from backlogged countries because it will take 6-12 years for people from countries that are backlogged in EB green card category. This causes more backlogged EB green card categories, and more incentive for consulting companies to hire from backlogged countries. So less people from other countries are hired on H1.
As someone said on this forum, I took resume and my qualifications for the job interview, I did not take my birth certificate for the job interview. So why should the EB green card, which is a direct benefit of my employment, be judged based on where my birth certificate was issued?
Country quota system is WRONG at every level. Its only a matter of time that it will be removed. Sorry, if your application is not approved before the removal of country quota system.
.
If country quotas are removed in employment based category, skilled immigrants from other countries will get EQUAL chance just as skilled immigrants from India and China.
Here is a problem arising as the result of country quotas -
1.) Huge backlogs in EB green card categories
2.) Consulting companies apply for H1 for more and more people from backlogged countries because it will take 6-12 years for people from countries that are backlogged in EB green card category. This causes more backlogged EB green card categories, and more incentive for consulting companies to hire from backlogged countries. So less people from other countries are hired on H1.
As someone said on this forum, I took resume and my qualifications for the job interview, I did not take my birth certificate for the job interview. So why should the EB green card, which is a direct benefit of my employment, be judged based on where my birth certificate was issued?
Country quota system is WRONG at every level. Its only a matter of time that it will be removed. Sorry, if your application is not approved before the removal of country quota system.
.
more...
makeup hot quotes and poems
stucklabor
07-25 08:43 PM
Guys,
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Once more unto the breach, my English friends.
BKarnik, there are sections in INA that use the phrase "Employment Authorization". For instance, see this base page for INA.
http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act
Sec. 106 deals with Employment authorization of battered spouses, right on the front page of the link. There are other sections in INA that deal specifically with Employment Authorization. The problem obviously is that each class of aliens eligible for Employment Authorization has their EAD specified in their own section. 8CFR ties all of these classes together in a single place.
This argument is not new. I had started a thread a while back http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=556&highlight=bkarnik
which met with essentially the same reply from the IV moderators. My underlying issue is that the term "EAD" or anything remotely similar does not even appear in the INA unless I missed it and if so, I would really appreciate it if someone show me where it is.
Once more unto the breach, my English friends.
BKarnik, there are sections in INA that use the phrase "Employment Authorization". For instance, see this base page for INA.
http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act
Sec. 106 deals with Employment authorization of battered spouses, right on the front page of the link. There are other sections in INA that deal specifically with Employment Authorization. The problem obviously is that each class of aliens eligible for Employment Authorization has their EAD specified in their own section. 8CFR ties all of these classes together in a single place.
girlfriend quotes and poems about life
.soulty
03-11 11:39 PM
Ok guys Poll is up! :)
I didnt include the wires on the poll since there was a character restriction.. the wires are for those interested in how the scene was created.
Wireframes:
Eilsoe: wireframe (http://www.avalon-rev.dk/junk/wireframe.gif)
BlueSunD: wireframe (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/BlueSunD/Maya/Final4Views.jpg)
Grinch: wireframe (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/wire.jpg)(can you provide a larger screenshot?)
Thirdworldman: wireframe (http://www.inmod.com/casey/subway_wire.jpg)
All the renders looks great, great job everyone...:thumb:
Good luck!
I didnt include the wires on the poll since there was a character restriction.. the wires are for those interested in how the scene was created.
Wireframes:
Eilsoe: wireframe (http://www.avalon-rev.dk/junk/wireframe.gif)
BlueSunD: wireframe (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/BlueSunD/Maya/Final4Views.jpg)
Grinch: wireframe (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/wire.jpg)(can you provide a larger screenshot?)
Thirdworldman: wireframe (http://www.inmod.com/casey/subway_wire.jpg)
All the renders looks great, great job everyone...:thumb:
Good luck!
hairstyles quotes and poems about life
Ramba
07-04 07:25 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
karthkc
07-14 06:27 PM
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Will USCIS come to know I quite Employer A before completing 180 days?
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
What document should I send to USCIS now?
Nowhere in this post, do I see the fact that the OP used AC21 when he moved in August 2007.
Does not AC21 come in when you have used EAD to move instead of a H1 transfer?
In my understanding, by doing a H1 transfer rather than invoking AC21, the OP preserved the status of the original petition unless the employer revoked the I140 for fraud. If that's the case, shouldn't the RFE be worded differently?
If that's not the case, all the OP has to do is craft a response to the RFE with an Employment Verification Letter from his current employer attesting to the similar nature of job etc.. and move forward.
Either way, an attorney would be the safest bet..
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Will USCIS come to know I quite Employer A before completing 180 days?
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
What document should I send to USCIS now?
Nowhere in this post, do I see the fact that the OP used AC21 when he moved in August 2007.
Does not AC21 come in when you have used EAD to move instead of a H1 transfer?
In my understanding, by doing a H1 transfer rather than invoking AC21, the OP preserved the status of the original petition unless the employer revoked the I140 for fraud. If that's the case, shouldn't the RFE be worded differently?
If that's not the case, all the OP has to do is craft a response to the RFE with an Employment Verification Letter from his current employer attesting to the similar nature of job etc.. and move forward.
Either way, an attorney would be the safest bet..
dentist1
04-09 06:47 PM
Thanks Papu !!!! thats great....
His name is Pappu and not Papu also what is so great about this bulletin buddy.It sucks bigtime.
His name is Pappu and not Papu also what is so great about this bulletin buddy.It sucks bigtime.
No comments:
Post a Comment