vin13
02-22 06:44 PM
I am keeping track of the air miles donors and those requesting tickets. I may not get the time to acknowledge receiving the messages.
I will reach out to individuals as i get to coordinate the available miles with those who are in need.
Thanks
I will reach out to individuals as i get to coordinate the available miles with those who are in need.
Thanks
wallpaper hot print wallpaper muslimah wallpaper muslimah. wallpaper muslimah cartoon.
sam_hoosier
12-05 04:52 PM
There is clear guidance in that H1-B petitioner seeking extension does not have to be the same employer that had filed (and approved) the I-140. Once you have an approved 140, anyone can extend your H1 for 3 years
Where can I find that documentation ?
Where can I find that documentation ?
Winner
06-11 08:02 AM
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SEND THE MESSAGE. WE WILL ALSO START WITH THE PHONE CAMPAIGN IN THE MORNING.
Reason being, the other side is writing letters to other Senators to seek their support. They want to see this amendment pass. Here is the letter.
************************************************** ***************
COMPANIES LAYING-OFF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN WORKERS DON�T NEED GUEST WORKERS
Please Support the Sanders-Grassley Employ America Amendment to the Tax Extenders bill
Dear Colleague:
Since the recession started in December of 2007, nearly 8 million Americans have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate has nearly doubled. In total, 15 million Americans are officially unemployed, another 8.8 million Americans are working part-time only because they cannot find a full-time job, and more than one million workers have given up looking for work altogether.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Therefore, during the consideration of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we will be offering an amendment that would prohibit companies which have announced mass lay-offs over the past year from hiring guest workers, unless they can prove that their overall employment will not be reduced as a result of these lay-offs.
At a time when millions of Americans are out of work, the notion that we need to import labor from abroad because there are not enough qualified, willing or able American workers in this country rings hollow.
Recently, some of the very companies that have hired tens of thousands of guest-workers from overseas have announced large scale lay-offs of American workers. The high-tech industry, a major employer of H-1B guest workers, has announced over 330,000 job cuts since 2008. The construction industry, a major employer of H-2B guest-workers, has laid-off 1.9 million workers since December of 2007.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, signed into law last February, included a provision to prevent companies receiving assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program from replacing laid-off American workers with guest-workers from overseas.
The Employ America Act expands upon this provision to prevent any company engaged in a mass lay-off of American workers from importing cheaper labor from abroad through temporary guest-worker programs. Those companies that are truly facing labor shortages would not be impacted by this legislation and could continue to obtain employer-sponsored visas. Only companies that are laying-off a large number of Americans would be barred from importing foreign workers through guest worker programs.
If you would like to co-sponsor this amendment, please have your staff contact Warren Gunnels in Sen. Sanders� office at 8-6358 or Kathy Nuebel Kovarik in Sen. Grassley's office at 4-3744.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________
BERNARD SANDERS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
************************************************** ***************
This underscores the urgency. Please act on the action item NOW.
Reason being, the other side is writing letters to other Senators to seek their support. They want to see this amendment pass. Here is the letter.
************************************************** ***************
COMPANIES LAYING-OFF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN WORKERS DON�T NEED GUEST WORKERS
Please Support the Sanders-Grassley Employ America Amendment to the Tax Extenders bill
Dear Colleague:
Since the recession started in December of 2007, nearly 8 million Americans have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate has nearly doubled. In total, 15 million Americans are officially unemployed, another 8.8 million Americans are working part-time only because they cannot find a full-time job, and more than one million workers have given up looking for work altogether.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Therefore, during the consideration of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we will be offering an amendment that would prohibit companies which have announced mass lay-offs over the past year from hiring guest workers, unless they can prove that their overall employment will not be reduced as a result of these lay-offs.
At a time when millions of Americans are out of work, the notion that we need to import labor from abroad because there are not enough qualified, willing or able American workers in this country rings hollow.
Recently, some of the very companies that have hired tens of thousands of guest-workers from overseas have announced large scale lay-offs of American workers. The high-tech industry, a major employer of H-1B guest workers, has announced over 330,000 job cuts since 2008. The construction industry, a major employer of H-2B guest-workers, has laid-off 1.9 million workers since December of 2007.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, signed into law last February, included a provision to prevent companies receiving assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program from replacing laid-off American workers with guest-workers from overseas.
The Employ America Act expands upon this provision to prevent any company engaged in a mass lay-off of American workers from importing cheaper labor from abroad through temporary guest-worker programs. Those companies that are truly facing labor shortages would not be impacted by this legislation and could continue to obtain employer-sponsored visas. Only companies that are laying-off a large number of Americans would be barred from importing foreign workers through guest worker programs.
If you would like to co-sponsor this amendment, please have your staff contact Warren Gunnels in Sen. Sanders� office at 8-6358 or Kathy Nuebel Kovarik in Sen. Grassley's office at 4-3744.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________
BERNARD SANDERS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
************************************************** ***************
This underscores the urgency. Please act on the action item NOW.
2011 pictures wallpaper muslimah kartun. wallpaper muslimah. wallpaper muslimah
immigrationmatters30
09-19 02:25 PM
What if 485 was not filed but have an approved 140? Economy is taking big hits on the all the consulting firms even the big ones.I know this because I work for one and I was told budget spending on IT is going to be really tight moving forward for another couple of years espcially in financial sector.
more...
GCard_Dream
01-16 12:54 PM
Just signed up for $20 recurring payments through Paypal. Subscription#S-91A48116HP955223R
Let's make this a 100 page thread with messages filled with new contributions.
Let's make this a 100 page thread with messages filled with new contributions.
Buran
02-15 01:09 PM
Everybody stands in one single queue......one line not five lines......one line my friend, irrespective of your nationality. so if you wait 2 years, or 2 hours..I wait the same. Unlike NOW, where some people wait 5-8 years and others 1-2 years.
I don\'t want to stand in line three times longer just because 60 percent of the applicants are natives of one country. Look what\'s going on with H-1B. There is no per-country quota and ROW is simply screwed.
I don\'t want to stand in line three times longer just because 60 percent of the applicants are natives of one country. Look what\'s going on with H-1B. There is no per-country quota and ROW is simply screwed.
more...
PD_Dec2002
03-03 04:44 PM
My $0.02:
Add this option to the poll as well to get a realistic picture:
I will not buy a house tomorrow (even if I was promised a GC this evening) because we are in a recession and/or the real estate market is spiralling downwards.The 1 MM people in the line for EB green card (quoted from singhsa3's 02:48 pm post #6 http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=227738&postcount=6) as you say are highly skilled. And even though they have the money are not financially stupid (at least a significant chunk) to buy a house just for the lure of a green card. This "smart" significant chunk will buy a house when among other reasons, they believe market conditions are right and are comfortable with their decision. A house might be your single-most biggest investment/asset/liability that you will ever have and even a "gold" card (forget green card) will not make anyone place such bets.
We bought our house way back in 2002. We still don't have our green cards, but we bought it after evaluating the risks and rewards.
Regards,
Jayant
Add this option to the poll as well to get a realistic picture:
I will not buy a house tomorrow (even if I was promised a GC this evening) because we are in a recession and/or the real estate market is spiralling downwards.The 1 MM people in the line for EB green card (quoted from singhsa3's 02:48 pm post #6 http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=227738&postcount=6) as you say are highly skilled. And even though they have the money are not financially stupid (at least a significant chunk) to buy a house just for the lure of a green card. This "smart" significant chunk will buy a house when among other reasons, they believe market conditions are right and are comfortable with their decision. A house might be your single-most biggest investment/asset/liability that you will ever have and even a "gold" card (forget green card) will not make anyone place such bets.
We bought our house way back in 2002. We still don't have our green cards, but we bought it after evaluating the risks and rewards.
Regards,
Jayant
2010 wallpaper muslimah kartun. wallpaper muslimah kartun
no538
06-06 04:37 PM
Thanks for the info amitpan007.
That must have been a big surprise for you to see the Approval then?
I was under the impression that you'll start seeing continuous LUD's on your application before the approval.
Everyday I check my app and be disappointed that there is no LUD and wait for tomorrow.
That must have been a big surprise for you to see the Approval then?
I was under the impression that you'll start seeing continuous LUD's on your application before the approval.
Everyday I check my app and be disappointed that there is no LUD and wait for tomorrow.
more...
Macaca
07-01 11:28 AM
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Are you aware of a similar document that explains
country caps.
conditions that lead to initial retrogression. That is, from current to settingcurrent dates. This is what happened in Oct 2005 and will happen now when all dates are current. This is different from VB's that reset existing current dates.
Spencer HSU, Washington Post likes to rape USCIS. We can send him our issues if July VB is reset in the middle.
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Are you aware of a similar document that explains
country caps.
conditions that lead to initial retrogression. That is, from current to settingcurrent dates. This is what happened in Oct 2005 and will happen now when all dates are current. This is different from VB's that reset existing current dates.
Spencer HSU, Washington Post likes to rape USCIS. We can send him our issues if July VB is reset in the middle.
hair wallpaper muslimah kartun.
rajuram
12-11 10:25 PM
I got letters with receipt numbers for my wife and I.
more...
neelu
12-12 03:38 PM
I totally agree with you. That`s what I am saying too. I am glad that you got my point instead of refering me to INT. There are ways and we have to find out. I think core team should guide us in right direction
thx.
While I kinda agree, I think we should do our own research instead of asking core team to direct us for everything.
thx.
While I kinda agree, I think we should do our own research instead of asking core team to direct us for everything.
hot wallpaper islam muslimah.
Almond
07-05 12:18 PM
So many more places to go to on the internet and get free info and free forums to post on that making this one a paid members only forum would ensure you and a handful of others like you will be best friends posting and viewing on here by yourselves. At least it'll last for a couple of years, you know, longer than a western marriage because you're bound to be waiting considering the USCIS snail work pace. This forum should stay free so everyone can have access to it and be able to communicate with others in similar situations. If one feels like they can/want to contribute for whatever reason, it should be of their own choosing. I just joined so I don't have that sense of gratefulness that longer term posters have but I can see how that could change after being here for a while.
more...
house wallpaper muslimah kartun.
qasleuth
05-26 06:05 PM
You missed the point totally ! it's not about just excercising my right or giving hard time to the authority, it's about resisting/protesting the STUPID law in every legal manner possible.
I lost you there. Being silent and possibly getting arrested is protesting in a legal manner ? Why would you do that ? There are numerous other means of doing it.
when they ask for DL they don't do that without suspicion, or they don't do that only to the non-citizens, i hope you see the difference.
Being within 100 miles of the border ITSELF is grounds for being asked the question about your immigration status as per that law. There need not be additional suspicious activity.
AGAIN, in any civilized society people should not be stopped/searched/questioned without any suspicious activity. I hope i am clear enough this time.
Do not get me wrong, I fully agree with you on how bad it is to be subjected to such trauma. Suggesting being silent at the cost of being arrested is what bothered me from your post.
I lost you there. Being silent and possibly getting arrested is protesting in a legal manner ? Why would you do that ? There are numerous other means of doing it.
when they ask for DL they don't do that without suspicion, or they don't do that only to the non-citizens, i hope you see the difference.
Being within 100 miles of the border ITSELF is grounds for being asked the question about your immigration status as per that law. There need not be additional suspicious activity.
AGAIN, in any civilized society people should not be stopped/searched/questioned without any suspicious activity. I hope i am clear enough this time.
Do not get me wrong, I fully agree with you on how bad it is to be subjected to such trauma. Suggesting being silent at the cost of being arrested is what bothered me from your post.
tattoo muslimah sejati wallpaper,
ras
07-12 11:38 AM
am still unclear. Does it mean those who have PD prior to Jun 06 will get their GC? I cant believe it.
At the personal end, I have my GC filed with Dec 06 PD. However, I have a previous I140 approved with Sept 05. I was thinking about porting the priority date. If I port it now will I get my GC based on the previous priority date?
Ofcourse I dont intend to port it at this point of time because am planning to get married in another 3-4months. so can you guys let me know what would be the best approach. Is it porting the previous priority date now or wait till getting married and then port it? In such case will the spouse be eligible to file for 485 when it is current. am confused.
At the personal end, I have my GC filed with Dec 06 PD. However, I have a previous I140 approved with Sept 05. I was thinking about porting the priority date. If I port it now will I get my GC based on the previous priority date?
Ofcourse I dont intend to port it at this point of time because am planning to get married in another 3-4months. so can you guys let me know what would be the best approach. Is it porting the previous priority date now or wait till getting married and then port it? In such case will the spouse be eligible to file for 485 when it is current. am confused.
more...
pictures hair wallpaper muslimah. wallpapers wallpaper muslimah berpurdah.
new_gc
12-17 03:25 PM
My labor is filed in EB3 , and i am awaiting Certification.
My PD is Nov 2007.
I dont feel that i am gonna get even EAD in the next 10 years, with the current delays,unless something major changes.
Any hopes??
i myself am new to all this...but when i surveyed vb's from 1997..it was made current every 2.5 years...and i guess if not stuck in namecheck everything will be fine....and with current situation hopefully something good happens.....
My PD is Nov 2007.
I dont feel that i am gonna get even EAD in the next 10 years, with the current delays,unless something major changes.
Any hopes??
i myself am new to all this...but when i surveyed vb's from 1997..it was made current every 2.5 years...and i guess if not stuck in namecheck everything will be fine....and with current situation hopefully something good happens.....
dresses wallpaper muslimah. wallpaper
hsm2007
10-05 03:43 PM
Ask your attorney to call USCIS for confirmation. Did he add return receipt also? It should not be any issue once you get the confirmation. Good Luck!
Hi feedfront,
Like I mentioned before they use FedEx and so they send it to a different address since FedEx does not deliver to PO Box. Unfortunately I have no control over what my attorneys use for mailing out the response. They say they use FedEx and mail to a courier address. There is no return receipt in FedEx.
Hi feedfront,
Like I mentioned before they use FedEx and so they send it to a different address since FedEx does not deliver to PO Box. Unfortunately I have no control over what my attorneys use for mailing out the response. They say they use FedEx and mail to a courier address. There is no return receipt in FedEx.
more...
makeup dresses wallpaper muslimah
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.
girlfriend hairstyles wallpaper muslimah cartoon. wallpaper muslimah. wallpaper
redds777
06-10 04:51 PM
Sent
OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America
It will only take less then 1 minute of your time to click this link ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=15130466)
and send the message out
Please post this link on other forums and mail to friends asking them to join this action item.
OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America
It will only take less then 1 minute of your time to click this link ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=15130466)
and send the message out
Please post this link on other forums and mail to friends asking them to join this action item.
hairstyles wallpaper muslimah. muslimah Image
Bpositive
02-13 07:31 PM
More unfriendliness towards legal immigration + H1bs = more outsourcing by firms who can't find talent in US + lesser revenues from education + lesser number of top notch talent coming to the US + lesser number of innovative companies coming to US + less stronger relationships with growth economies
Bad, bad equation for US. If I were a US citizen who really cared for the long term success of the country, I would be really scared
Bad, bad equation for US. If I were a US citizen who really cared for the long term success of the country, I would be really scared
ujjvalkoul
01-17 03:00 PM
The Monthly newsletter that IV sent out may not be enough.....some people do not even read that...Subject line may have to be more urgent.....so that people take notice of the dire situation we are in in terms of funds....
Can IV Core send email to every member to contribute one time or recurring...in a separate email
Can IV Core send email to every member to contribute one time or recurring...in a separate email
squishy
03-07 07:45 AM
same here :p:
No comments:
Post a Comment