coopheal
04-09 05:47 PM
Wiki updated to include May VB.
Past Visa Bulletin Data - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data)
Past Visa Bulletin Data - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data)
wallpaper Lou Reed - Lou Reed Live
pappu
07-01 10:23 PM
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR POTENTIAL PLAINTIFFS
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/VISA AVAILABILITY LITIGATION
This document is a form, which means that you can only type in the areas within each box. Click in the boxes and start typing. If your answers are longer than the box provided, please use a separate sheet of paper. For the check boxes, click in the correct box to mark it. Thank you!
Please be sure to include a copy of the following with this questionnaire:
• Completed I-485 as submitted to USCIS, and any cover letter sent with it;
• Evidence of method and date of mailing (USPS, Fed Ex, etc)
• A list or index of attachments sent with the I-485 (if the cover letter provides the list or index, no need to send us a separate one)
• USCIS letter rejecting the adjustment application and / or any related correspondence, if received.
Date questionnaire is completed:
Completed by:
Attorney Contact Information:
Name
Email
Firm
Address
Telephone
Fax
Adjustment Applicant Information:
Name
Address
Phone
Email
Nationality or citizenship
Adjustment Application Filing Information:
Date adjustment application was submitted to USCIS and method of submission:
Where was the adjustment sent? (Please note the specific DHS(USCIS) office)
What was the employment-based immigrant category under which the adjustment application applied?
USCIS rejection of the adjustment application:
Did DHS (USCIS) expressly inform the applicant or attorney, orally or in writing, why it was rejecting or returning the adjustment application?
If yes, please explain in detail:
Please send us a copy of any written notice or other correspondence from USCIS rejecting or returning the adjustment application.
2
Harm to adjustment applicant:
Please describe any harm that the adjustment applicant has suffered or is continuing to suffer due to the rejection of the adjustment application.
Please return this form and documents by email or fax to:
visabulletin@ailf.org
or fax (202) 742-5619 attn. AILF LAC
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/VISA AVAILABILITY LITIGATION
This document is a form, which means that you can only type in the areas within each box. Click in the boxes and start typing. If your answers are longer than the box provided, please use a separate sheet of paper. For the check boxes, click in the correct box to mark it. Thank you!
Please be sure to include a copy of the following with this questionnaire:
• Completed I-485 as submitted to USCIS, and any cover letter sent with it;
• Evidence of method and date of mailing (USPS, Fed Ex, etc)
• A list or index of attachments sent with the I-485 (if the cover letter provides the list or index, no need to send us a separate one)
• USCIS letter rejecting the adjustment application and / or any related correspondence, if received.
Date questionnaire is completed:
Completed by:
Attorney Contact Information:
Name
Firm
Address
Telephone
Fax
Adjustment Applicant Information:
Name
Address
Phone
Nationality or citizenship
Adjustment Application Filing Information:
Date adjustment application was submitted to USCIS and method of submission:
Where was the adjustment sent? (Please note the specific DHS(USCIS) office)
What was the employment-based immigrant category under which the adjustment application applied?
USCIS rejection of the adjustment application:
Did DHS (USCIS) expressly inform the applicant or attorney, orally or in writing, why it was rejecting or returning the adjustment application?
If yes, please explain in detail:
Please send us a copy of any written notice or other correspondence from USCIS rejecting or returning the adjustment application.
2
Harm to adjustment applicant:
Please describe any harm that the adjustment applicant has suffered or is continuing to suffer due to the rejection of the adjustment application.
Please return this form and documents by email or fax to:
visabulletin@ailf.org
or fax (202) 742-5619 attn. AILF LAC
Macaca
01-28 12:06 PM
In the new year, I have not seen any posts expalining how IV is "working" on resolving our issues. All that is posted now is requests for money. I know more money is needed and would be glad to contribute, if only the senior members show that some serious efforts are being made in the background. Yes IV did do very good work last year, but that is history now; but what work is going on now, nobody knows. Don't need details, but even broad details will help. Is something being done for appropriation bills, no one knows or tells.
For example, after the elections no attempts virtually no attempts have been done to do webfax campaign tragetted towards pro-immigration inclined politicians. No lists have been made of such politicians. Just by waking up few days before the bills are discussed is not going to help.
Once again, like many other posts that pop up at the rate of 1/day, very reasonable remarks. For a change they are civil. I have thought about all of them.
The only difference is that I have some more time these days to think of the big picture. I concluded that the absence of these issues (and numerous others) is really not effecting any progress, and I can ignore these issues and contribute to progress.
As a concrete example, I have thought of webfaxes/lobbying. Based on my analysis (which is completely independent of IV) of the current state of our bill, nothing significant is happening about it right now and it not posible to gauge the future. Thus, it is not an effective point for webfaxes/lobbying. With this conclusion, there is nothing to say.
Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion as long as we move ahead.
For example, after the elections no attempts virtually no attempts have been done to do webfax campaign tragetted towards pro-immigration inclined politicians. No lists have been made of such politicians. Just by waking up few days before the bills are discussed is not going to help.
Once again, like many other posts that pop up at the rate of 1/day, very reasonable remarks. For a change they are civil. I have thought about all of them.
The only difference is that I have some more time these days to think of the big picture. I concluded that the absence of these issues (and numerous others) is really not effecting any progress, and I can ignore these issues and contribute to progress.
As a concrete example, I have thought of webfaxes/lobbying. Based on my analysis (which is completely independent of IV) of the current state of our bill, nothing significant is happening about it right now and it not posible to gauge the future. Thus, it is not an effective point for webfaxes/lobbying. With this conclusion, there is nothing to say.
Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion as long as we move ahead.
2011 NY Times obit
GCWish
03-09 07:31 PM
It is the right time to do some concrete action to bring out the facts that
1. Approving the EBs would not add to any significant shift in employment demographics, given that all these people are in the US already
2. The benefit that this would bring on the demand side esp.housing market
Let�s start a letter campaign to the attention of the Obama administration and the USCIS secretary Janet Napolitano
1. Approving the EBs would not add to any significant shift in employment demographics, given that all these people are in the US already
2. The benefit that this would bring on the demand side esp.housing market
Let�s start a letter campaign to the attention of the Obama administration and the USCIS secretary Janet Napolitano
more...
hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:05 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
gimme_GC2006
05-15 09:58 AM
I am doing Kelley Direct and would definitely recommend it. The Professors are great and course work feels like your regular full-time load with assignments, quizzes, mid-terms and finals, project works, case discussions and some weekly classes. Most of the professors are very interactive and you can always call them. The teaching faculty is top-quality with some of them having Ph.d's from MIT's and Stanford's. Marketing is considered top-notch at Kelley. Curriculum allows some flexibility and course load can be completed in 2 to 4 year period requiring 1week compulsory on-campus presence in 1st and 2nd year. If you have time, you can also participate in 3 to 4 week clinics for 1.5 credit hours in summers. It is now costing me around $975/credit hour with 48 credits required to graduate. Add to this cost of books at other administration/technology fee which might add upto $5k to $8k.
I have couple of friends who graduated from Thunderbird too. It is top-notch for International Business but doesnot allow the flexibility to complete at your own pace. My friends were totally tied up with work and course-load for 2 years. It requires somewhere between 51 to 54 credit hours to graduate. It has two compulsory International workshop clinics each in 1st and 2nd year for a period of 3 to 4 weeks. This is partly paid from the fee, while you need to pay for flight tickets and meals. I think the books are included in the $57k+ tuition for this program.
Kelley full-time is ranked between 18 and 23 depending on which source you would like to use. Its Marketing Discipline is in top10. Thunderbird is not ranked in TOP50 but it's INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS discipline is ranked number one.
Thanks Phani!!.
This is great information. I will do some research. How much GMAT score is required?
Probably I will check on the site.
Are you married and kids? You are doing online one right?
I have couple of friends who graduated from Thunderbird too. It is top-notch for International Business but doesnot allow the flexibility to complete at your own pace. My friends were totally tied up with work and course-load for 2 years. It requires somewhere between 51 to 54 credit hours to graduate. It has two compulsory International workshop clinics each in 1st and 2nd year for a period of 3 to 4 weeks. This is partly paid from the fee, while you need to pay for flight tickets and meals. I think the books are included in the $57k+ tuition for this program.
Kelley full-time is ranked between 18 and 23 depending on which source you would like to use. Its Marketing Discipline is in top10. Thunderbird is not ranked in TOP50 but it's INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS discipline is ranked number one.
Thanks Phani!!.
This is great information. I will do some research. How much GMAT score is required?
Probably I will check on the site.
Are you married and kids? You are doing online one right?
more...
clif
03-07 09:23 AM
What if my employer is definitely going to revoke my approved I-140 upon my resignation (past 180 days)? Do I need to file "Notice of I-140 Portability"?
Also, in the above posts when people are saying that almost no support is needed from the new employer to keep 485 process going smoothly, is it safe to assume they are changing jobs using EAD and not doing H1B transfer?
One more question, my employer will revoke my I-140 and my H1B. How long can I be without a job after they do that? Are the above actions of my employer very likely to result in a RFE from USCIS? If so, what will USCIS ask for in RFE?
Thank for all the advise.
---------------------------------
Contributed $100.
Also, in the above posts when people are saying that almost no support is needed from the new employer to keep 485 process going smoothly, is it safe to assume they are changing jobs using EAD and not doing H1B transfer?
One more question, my employer will revoke my I-140 and my H1B. How long can I be without a job after they do that? Are the above actions of my employer very likely to result in a RFE from USCIS? If so, what will USCIS ask for in RFE?
Thank for all the advise.
---------------------------------
Contributed $100.
2010 Lou Reed Live: Take No
keshtwo
07-09 04:46 PM
what made you think so ?Do you think they are violating the law and allocating more than 7% to other countries?
Spillover means India, china and mexico get more than 7% for one year, dont it?
Spillover means India, china and mexico get more than 7% for one year, dont it?
more...
CR1
04-15 10:42 PM
I have been here about a year and am on an L1 with my wife and two children who are on L2s. We are thinking about starting the GC process. While I am sure this topic has been discussed many times before in this forum, what are the pitfalls, and how long does the process usually take? My understanding is it's relatively straightforward for L1s, however I have seen a number of posts talking of converting from L1s to H1s, so I am little confused as to which is the best visa to be on to apply for GCs.
Many thanks.
Many thanks.
hair Lou Reed,Set Of 4 Live
tikka
07-03 10:49 PM
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
more...
EB3_SEP04
05-26 06:33 PM
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.
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.
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 am not sure if they asking me to step out for further questioning or even taking me to a police station would be consiered an arrest. i mean i don't think the event will be recordded in my history/profile in such a way that anyone reviewing my history will say "eb3_sep04 was arrested in NH in May 2009 for ....". I think detention is not same as arrrest, i view detention is something like cops requiring anyone wait reseonably longer (> an hour or so). they wouldn't handcuff me for not saying a word. Again these are just my thoughts, i am not an expert on those jargens.
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.
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 am not sure if they asking me to step out for further questioning or even taking me to a police station would be consiered an arrest. i mean i don't think the event will be recordded in my history/profile in such a way that anyone reviewing my history will say "eb3_sep04 was arrested in NH in May 2009 for ....". I think detention is not same as arrrest, i view detention is something like cops requiring anyone wait reseonably longer (> an hour or so). they wouldn't handcuff me for not saying a word. Again these are just my thoughts, i am not an expert on those jargens.
hot Anyhow, Lou Reed#39;s Berlin
eb3retro
08-17 12:16 AM
Very Good first post :eek:!!! Please hide wherever you were hiding till now, STOP judging.
clever adj
Definition: bright, ingenious
Antonyms: awkward, foolish, idiotic, ignorant, naive, senseless, stupid, unclever
I am looking to see if he will show up too..looks like he is not coming back..so much for one and the only post..
clever adj
Definition: bright, ingenious
Antonyms: awkward, foolish, idiotic, ignorant, naive, senseless, stupid, unclever
I am looking to see if he will show up too..looks like he is not coming back..so much for one and the only post..
more...
house When newlywed Lou Reed took
wellwishergc
07-13 10:54 AM
Right on! You are absolutely right! It just needs people to amplify their vision. Even if there is a hidden agenda for somebody else, why shouldn't you be happy if it benefits both you and the other person?
As anyone in this forums know about this "may-a-times-told" joke about a bunch of people in an airplane that have to make some hard decision on dropping out some of thier own to save the flying aircraft. As one by one jumps out of the aircraft for a noble cause of saving the other person - our own Desi pushed the next one crying " Gandhiji ki Jai" - saving himself instead of others.
The moral of the story (which people never really bothered to infer) was that our Desi folks are trigger ready to pull someone down when it comes to me versus them. I hate to stereotype people - based on some unfounded and preconceived notions , but the more and more postings I see like this, it just reinforces my beliefs that we are still gullible enough to be divided no matter what the past had taught us.
I enjoy visiting IV forums - because of all the Indian based forums - this was one place where people came together rallied for a cause - something that I could not find in any other place. Now I am seeing some folks postings that spites and pits one against another - without understanding the real issue.
What or why does it matter if Murthy sending a letter to DHS or its Director is all about getting credit for her? Why do we have to think that its "us versus them" within our group - when we are all fighting for one single cause?
Need some civility here - Please!
As anyone in this forums know about this "may-a-times-told" joke about a bunch of people in an airplane that have to make some hard decision on dropping out some of thier own to save the flying aircraft. As one by one jumps out of the aircraft for a noble cause of saving the other person - our own Desi pushed the next one crying " Gandhiji ki Jai" - saving himself instead of others.
The moral of the story (which people never really bothered to infer) was that our Desi folks are trigger ready to pull someone down when it comes to me versus them. I hate to stereotype people - based on some unfounded and preconceived notions , but the more and more postings I see like this, it just reinforces my beliefs that we are still gullible enough to be divided no matter what the past had taught us.
I enjoy visiting IV forums - because of all the Indian based forums - this was one place where people came together rallied for a cause - something that I could not find in any other place. Now I am seeing some folks postings that spites and pits one against another - without understanding the real issue.
What or why does it matter if Murthy sending a letter to DHS or its Director is all about getting credit for her? Why do we have to think that its "us versus them" within our group - when we are all fighting for one single cause?
Need some civility here - Please!
tattoo Lou Reed / Live by bradleyloos
va_labor2002
07-24 08:47 AM
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
I totally agree with you. USCIS can take a decision without any BILL from the congress. I already sent a letter to USCIS director. I think IV should contact USCIS director and ask help regarding retrogression. We ,5000 members, can send letters to USCIS director and WHitehouse. They will listen to us.
Good luck..
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
I totally agree with you. USCIS can take a decision without any BILL from the congress. I already sent a letter to USCIS director. I think IV should contact USCIS director and ask help regarding retrogression. We ,5000 members, can send letters to USCIS director and WHitehouse. They will listen to us.
Good luck..
more...
pictures Lou Reed - Live In Italy
sukhwinderd
02-09 08:43 AM
I would like to join, I live in Orlando area... do you happen to hear from other interested members?
most likely one of my friends will join. so 3 of us till now. i am trying to check with my other friends.
most likely one of my friends will join. so 3 of us till now. i am trying to check with my other friends.
dresses Lou Reed Live ( 1975 )
wizkid732
07-30 07:47 AM
It is a painful long journey. Remember there are always alternatives, just be prepared and dont put all your eggs in one basket. I did that once GC, House and School all supported by one job and when I was laid off all came crashing.
I wish you all the very best.
15 years is too long. Khudos to you
I am not crying buddy, Just letting others know how they treat.You might have known about this already since you experienced it. Anyway, now I knew that there are more sad pasts here than mine.
FYI this is not my first H1, this is my second H1.Total 12 years since I landed in US for first time.
I wish you all the very best.
15 years is too long. Khudos to you
I am not crying buddy, Just letting others know how they treat.You might have known about this already since you experienced it. Anyway, now I knew that there are more sad pasts here than mine.
FYI this is not my first H1, this is my second H1.Total 12 years since I landed in US for first time.
more...
makeup lou reed live Lou Reed
ags123
03-10 07:30 PM
I agree that preadjudication could be happening now and the flood gates are to be opened for Eb2 I soon. Otherwise why would USCIS work on apps and send for RFE etc?
I have seen high activitiy in the last few months.
I have seen high activitiy in the last few months.
girlfriend Lou Reed - Street Hassle [live
jonty_11
12-13 10:13 AM
Count me and 2 more members with me....lets have a plan..and execute it.
hairstyles The one to watch this Friday
chanduv23
09-26 12:13 PM
Excellent team work IV - now lets all thank her for changing making the correction.
coldcloud
06-10 09:14 PM
what the heck r u talking. i just renewed my EAD myself, no employment letter, no pay slip, no crap. Don't blabber if you dont know the details.
Is this forum for letting every body know off what is coming and wake us to act are show off that I have an EAD and I escape from this situation and you are the ones caught in this? Are you not ashamed of your self? Did you read Pappu's initial posting fully?
Is this forum for letting every body know off what is coming and wake us to act are show off that I have an EAD and I escape from this situation and you are the ones caught in this? Are you not ashamed of your self? Did you read Pappu's initial posting fully?
pappu
01-18 11:16 AM
We need at least 1000 members signing up for the monthly contributions in a month. I am sure we can do that. We have 8000 members and it should be easy. Till now we have only 100 signups
No comments:
Post a Comment