ramus
07-03 05:32 PM
Please ask others to do it now...
Thanks.
Thanks.
wallpaper Ke$ha in Maxim
nashim
01-13 02:59 PM
can you please share your views and experiences of Symphony Corp (www.symphony.cc)
GCVivek
05-23 01:46 PM
Here is the issue: If you are thinking of doing MBA to get a management job in a US company and are an Indian, please forget it. You might get a low level management position paying at most 80K. MBA is not for everyone - you have to have it in you to get something out of an MBA. It's not about landing that good job. You hear about the 1 crore offers that IIM students get from top American companies? Well, they are kicked out of the job in 1 year and then join Infosys or Wipro. Not because they are not brilliant but because their conversational skills are terrible and so is their language. Unless you are planning to settle in India OR REALLY THINKING OF PUTTING A LOT OF EFFORT in mastering the English language and your outlook, an MBA is not going to serve you in the US.
Like, someone said, an MBA is more than just a degree. You can get a better, much higher paying job (300K+) without an MBA but with excellent logic, hard work, conversational skills and outgoing personality. No GC required :)
Like, someone said, an MBA is more than just a degree. You can get a better, much higher paying job (300K+) without an MBA but with excellent logic, hard work, conversational skills and outgoing personality. No GC required :)
2011 pictures kesha maxim poster.
jcmenon
07-24 02:49 PM
jc menon...have u ever taken a law class? - No
do u have a jd? - No
why are u then so adamant on thinking u "found" the loophole? - I am not saying I found a loophole
we are not stupid morons over here. - You guies are intelligent and more proactive and more intelligent than us, that is why we are trying to find out some solution out here.
Neither is the AILA/millions of lawyers that are associated with immigration law. - Attorneys are here for a purpose, it is their living their bread and butter, they are of no one, If you spend money they can fight loosing battle for ages.
Please for heaven sake dont start now about some conspiracy theory about immigration lawyers having a preference for backlog. - I am not a conspiracy theorist, but you seem to be loosing your cool.
there is no loophole, there is no precedent and by emailing the director with a moronic question will only show that probably that we have morons stuck in retrogression and probably we deserve to be stuck.
No question is moronic, at least we get a reply for a question, if IV do not want to pursue this, that is another story.
do u have a jd? - No
why are u then so adamant on thinking u "found" the loophole? - I am not saying I found a loophole
we are not stupid morons over here. - You guies are intelligent and more proactive and more intelligent than us, that is why we are trying to find out some solution out here.
Neither is the AILA/millions of lawyers that are associated with immigration law. - Attorneys are here for a purpose, it is their living their bread and butter, they are of no one, If you spend money they can fight loosing battle for ages.
Please for heaven sake dont start now about some conspiracy theory about immigration lawyers having a preference for backlog. - I am not a conspiracy theorist, but you seem to be loosing your cool.
there is no loophole, there is no precedent and by emailing the director with a moronic question will only show that probably that we have morons stuck in retrogression and probably we deserve to be stuck.
No question is moronic, at least we get a reply for a question, if IV do not want to pursue this, that is another story.
more...
dummgelauft
08-21 12:51 PM
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. I came here initially for ONE month and was approved at the airport customs terminal to stay that long. When I got here, it was for a visit with my fiance only. Unfortunately, things did not work out and we broke it off. Thank God! However, I was staying with his uncle and aunt, and they had a disabled man in the house. HE turned out to be my sponsor when they asked me to care for him while they were doing long haul trucking. I agreed to do this and we immediately contacted USCIS to get instructions on what needed to be filed first. With that information in hand, we filed everything they requested. All the stuff on the RFE I received has never been mentioned before now and if it had, it would have been filed along with the rest. There are tons of applications, how is one supposed to know what to file and when if there are no specific instructions? I have gone through all the copies we have of all the required applications and I still do not see anything where all these other forms were to be filed along with the I-485.
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
Okay, It is still a bit fuzzy, but lot clearer than your initial post. Almost all of us here on this forum are professionally qualified Employment Based applicants, with fairly straightforward, albeit extremently slow moving cases. Nearly all of us have been sponsored by our employers and we make sure that we are legal, in this country, every day of the year.
Now, coming to your case.
I am certain this "disabled man" you are caring for, had all good intentions, but he screwed up royally. You can not just "apply for a I-485". There has to be a basis from one of the following
(1) Family based
(2) Employment based
(3) Humanitarian / Refugee
(4) Diversity Based
It is still not clear, what CATEGORY he applied for you under.
(a) Can not be family based (you are not his spouse, child, sibling etc)
(b) You CERTAINLY DO NOT qualify under Employment based application.
(c) You absolutey CAN NOT apply under Refugee or Diversity (Canadians are shut out of diversity visa quota)
So, it is now time to stop pretending that you "were needed here". Nobody is indispensible.
Get your self back in to Cananda and work towards building your life back up.
Bon fin semaine!!
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
Okay, It is still a bit fuzzy, but lot clearer than your initial post. Almost all of us here on this forum are professionally qualified Employment Based applicants, with fairly straightforward, albeit extremently slow moving cases. Nearly all of us have been sponsored by our employers and we make sure that we are legal, in this country, every day of the year.
Now, coming to your case.
I am certain this "disabled man" you are caring for, had all good intentions, but he screwed up royally. You can not just "apply for a I-485". There has to be a basis from one of the following
(1) Family based
(2) Employment based
(3) Humanitarian / Refugee
(4) Diversity Based
It is still not clear, what CATEGORY he applied for you under.
(a) Can not be family based (you are not his spouse, child, sibling etc)
(b) You CERTAINLY DO NOT qualify under Employment based application.
(c) You absolutey CAN NOT apply under Refugee or Diversity (Canadians are shut out of diversity visa quota)
So, it is now time to stop pretending that you "were needed here". Nobody is indispensible.
Get your self back in to Cananda and work towards building your life back up.
Bon fin semaine!!
acecupid
07-03 12:36 PM
Would you agree that wives and kids should not be included in the EB GC quota?
If you read my earlier response, you would not be asking me this question. Just to repeat myself, I completely agree with you that wives and kids should not be included to the EB GC quota!
If you read my earlier response, you would not be asking me this question. Just to repeat myself, I completely agree with you that wives and kids should not be included to the EB GC quota!
more...
nixstor
04-23 02:30 PM
Are you one of the guys who considered going to France as you cannot go to school Full time?
2010 hairstyles kesha maxim poster. kesha maxim poster. avril; kesha maxim
nixstor
10-16 05:59 PM
I personally think there is a possible ambiguity in the request (especially since we are dealing with a government agency). So we should probably bullet point the data we need at least and if people don't think there is any harm in putting in a table for the format of data needed that will make things very clear. I agree with you that breakdown of quarter/month is probably not needed and might actually hurt our chances of getting the answer within reasonable amount of time.
Hear ya. Even though its repetitive,for the sake of clarity and to avoid ambiguity/frivolous answer, I have updated the document in google docs and the attachment by one of our other member prabhu.
Thanks for your feedback.
Hear ya. Even though its repetitive,for the sake of clarity and to avoid ambiguity/frivolous answer, I have updated the document in google docs and the attachment by one of our other member prabhu.
Thanks for your feedback.
more...
Aah_GC
04-25 10:33 AM
Am just curious to know how many of you (approved ones) used AC21 portability and if there were any ramifications. Would be great to know what the experience was and can help the rest of us.
hair kesha maxim poster. donald
Ramba
07-04 09:15 PM
Rambha:
First hats off to you to source information and then put it on this forum.
However, how will this mistake be rectified?
What happens to us who have spend so much money on preparations?
Among these 700K or so applicants, iam not sure how many have to leave the country because of various reasons before there PDs become current again in near future.
In that case, who should reimburse the costs? If this was a case of poor customer service, then they should also follow this age old saying in business community "Customer is always right" and promptly refund the expenses incurred.
I am for requesting the congress for a special vehicle for july filers. There should be a way out for all the affected applicants no matter what their PD was.
In matter of 2 weeks, the billion dollar mistake have costed us dearly in lot many other ways.
It is a really a good question. Unfortualtly no one going to pay back money, time. It is just a poor customer service. These are all the burdens we need to go thro, as a immigrants. We do not have much rights in a foreign land. I know, some guys sued INS for delaying 485 approval in early 2000. INS took more than 2 years to process 485 even it was not affercted by etrogression (entire 2 year PD was current). The law suit is not favorable to us.
First hats off to you to source information and then put it on this forum.
However, how will this mistake be rectified?
What happens to us who have spend so much money on preparations?
Among these 700K or so applicants, iam not sure how many have to leave the country because of various reasons before there PDs become current again in near future.
In that case, who should reimburse the costs? If this was a case of poor customer service, then they should also follow this age old saying in business community "Customer is always right" and promptly refund the expenses incurred.
I am for requesting the congress for a special vehicle for july filers. There should be a way out for all the affected applicants no matter what their PD was.
In matter of 2 weeks, the billion dollar mistake have costed us dearly in lot many other ways.
It is a really a good question. Unfortualtly no one going to pay back money, time. It is just a poor customer service. These are all the burdens we need to go thro, as a immigrants. We do not have much rights in a foreign land. I know, some guys sued INS for delaying 485 approval in early 2000. INS took more than 2 years to process 485 even it was not affercted by etrogression (entire 2 year PD was current). The law suit is not favorable to us.
more...
ashishgour
09-10 01:19 PM
nebody seeing the proceedings...or jus the eagle???
hot kesha maxim poster.
ronhira
04-09 07:02 PM
- the problem is with the congress, not with cis
Congress did not ask USCIS/DOS to subtract dependent visa numbers from 140K. If USCIS/DOS excludes dependent numbers from 140k, congress cannot question that because law doesn't mandate to include the dependent numbers in 140K.
-y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year
If USCIS/DOS doesn't agree to change their administration policy to exclude dependent visas from 140K after seeing our backlog, then who else do we have to blame.
Yes they are allocating 140K per year. But to who? In my view to the same applicant; one for primary applicant, another for his spouse, another for his kid, ....
Most of us here are 'keyboard ninjas'. Only very few contribute in actions and that contribution is hidden under donor forums. Without awareness of the good things happening, these keyboard-ninjas are not going to contribute in actions.
We all understand that blaming is not going to help anyone. But what else to do.
u'r saying that all these years uscis & dos was misinterpreting the law for counting dependents in the 140K count..... well, what is the army of 10,000 impotent immigration lawyers doing for last 15 years..... i know they r all dumb & sleazy..... but if that were the case someone in that useless army of 10,000 would have cared to file a lawsuit or someone in congress would have questioned uscis/dos..... the fact that no one questioned or filed for a suit just proves that uscis is interpreting the law correctly..... as much as i would like...... i am actually not convinced that its uscis fault for counting depends.... again here its the fault of the congress for framing the law like the way it is....
there are sleazy immigration lawyers who throw out this bullshit material hoping that some of it will stick, & guys like will think they r the gods..... in that sense its our fault to play right into the hands of sleazy immigration lawyers.... here r some of the creepiest of things thrown by some of these scam artist lawyers -
- fix backlog without immigration bill
- vb dates all current in 2 months
- spillover crap (this one is my favorite)
all that i'm trying to say is that we can do lot of things.... and beating down on uscis/dos is the last thing we all want to do....... becoz otherwise we waste the energy from our frustration/anger @ the wrong target......
Congress did not ask USCIS/DOS to subtract dependent visa numbers from 140K. If USCIS/DOS excludes dependent numbers from 140k, congress cannot question that because law doesn't mandate to include the dependent numbers in 140K.
-y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year
If USCIS/DOS doesn't agree to change their administration policy to exclude dependent visas from 140K after seeing our backlog, then who else do we have to blame.
Yes they are allocating 140K per year. But to who? In my view to the same applicant; one for primary applicant, another for his spouse, another for his kid, ....
Most of us here are 'keyboard ninjas'. Only very few contribute in actions and that contribution is hidden under donor forums. Without awareness of the good things happening, these keyboard-ninjas are not going to contribute in actions.
We all understand that blaming is not going to help anyone. But what else to do.
u'r saying that all these years uscis & dos was misinterpreting the law for counting dependents in the 140K count..... well, what is the army of 10,000 impotent immigration lawyers doing for last 15 years..... i know they r all dumb & sleazy..... but if that were the case someone in that useless army of 10,000 would have cared to file a lawsuit or someone in congress would have questioned uscis/dos..... the fact that no one questioned or filed for a suit just proves that uscis is interpreting the law correctly..... as much as i would like...... i am actually not convinced that its uscis fault for counting depends.... again here its the fault of the congress for framing the law like the way it is....
there are sleazy immigration lawyers who throw out this bullshit material hoping that some of it will stick, & guys like will think they r the gods..... in that sense its our fault to play right into the hands of sleazy immigration lawyers.... here r some of the creepiest of things thrown by some of these scam artist lawyers -
- fix backlog without immigration bill
- vb dates all current in 2 months
- spillover crap (this one is my favorite)
all that i'm trying to say is that we can do lot of things.... and beating down on uscis/dos is the last thing we all want to do....... becoz otherwise we waste the energy from our frustration/anger @ the wrong target......
more...
house kesha maxim poster. kesha used
Vsach
03-16 09:58 AM
Can we get rid of this "sick" person from the forum!!:rolleyes:
dudester,
I work for a REAL big company and have a REAL good job. Don't get worked up you might get a cardiac arrest. :)
And, please, gimme a break. H1B = high skilled? ya right.............keep living in your dream world buddy.........good for you. Most H1Bs, according to PUBLISHED research, earn less than $50,000.
Freaking diploma holders from India get an H1B easily...........you think the monkeys who work for the outsourcing firms in India are "highly-skilled" ??
:p
Dude, IT and software are low skill jobs..........wake up and smell the coffee. Your saying "highly skilled" and holding up a placard won't change that reality. No one wants any more low skilled EB3 types in this country anymore. They are found dime a dozen.
If your highness is so highly skilled, how come you are stuck in the EB3 queue and whine to get into EB2 ???
Yes i AM selfish..........you got a problem with that?
dudester,
I work for a REAL big company and have a REAL good job. Don't get worked up you might get a cardiac arrest. :)
And, please, gimme a break. H1B = high skilled? ya right.............keep living in your dream world buddy.........good for you. Most H1Bs, according to PUBLISHED research, earn less than $50,000.
Freaking diploma holders from India get an H1B easily...........you think the monkeys who work for the outsourcing firms in India are "highly-skilled" ??
:p
Dude, IT and software are low skill jobs..........wake up and smell the coffee. Your saying "highly skilled" and holding up a placard won't change that reality. No one wants any more low skilled EB3 types in this country anymore. They are found dime a dozen.
If your highness is so highly skilled, how come you are stuck in the EB3 queue and whine to get into EB2 ???
Yes i AM selfish..........you got a problem with that?
tattoo wilde maxim poster. olivia
NKR
07-03 11:09 PM
May I suggest the following reservations:
20% Other Backward Countries (OBC)
15% Scheduled Countries (SC)
15% Scheduled Territories (ST)
5% Kins of the armed forces
Remaining 55% for Highly Skilled people
Notfunny dude..
20% Other Backward Countries (OBC)
15% Scheduled Countries (SC)
15% Scheduled Territories (ST)
5% Kins of the armed forces
Remaining 55% for Highly Skilled people
Notfunny dude..
more...
pictures kesha maxim poster.
sweet_jungle
02-20 12:59 AM
How come these people do not get caught during H-1 approval process or during visa stamping at consulate or maybe later during GC process?
[QUOTE=chanduv23]Thats a new trend. They go to colleges and meet a group of Indian students who are about to graduate and take them out of drinks and dinner and give a presentation about their company. Then when these students come into OPT status, they are all given food + guest house accomodation. Then they are put under intense training for 2 to 3 months and made to do some mockup projects. Then their resumes are massaged with 4 to 5 years of experience ie experience from date they graduated in the under graduation and their MS education is stripped off on their resumes.
[QUOTE=chanduv23]Thats a new trend. They go to colleges and meet a group of Indian students who are about to graduate and take them out of drinks and dinner and give a presentation about their company. Then when these students come into OPT status, they are all given food + guest house accomodation. Then they are put under intense training for 2 to 3 months and made to do some mockup projects. Then their resumes are massaged with 4 to 5 years of experience ie experience from date they graduated in the under graduation and their MS education is stripped off on their resumes.
dresses makeup kesha maxim shoot.
vik352
07-01 06:12 PM
We already called the local lawmakers. This online petition can have two columns, one for people who are suffering because of this per country quota and other for people who support the idea (Friends/relatives/coworkers). We can start the petition and we may generate 100K signatures.
mpadapa: We will let you have the 1000001th signature:)
mpadapa: We will let you have the 1000001th signature:)
more...
makeup kesha maxim poster.
ajju
02-20 03:51 PM
I'd posted elsewhere about my Feb 13, 2008 conversation with the DOS official who sets cutoff dates:
Thats great news.. once pre Dec 2003 is cleared.. 2004 will have some hope.. though not so fast...
Thats great news.. once pre Dec 2003 is cleared.. 2004 will have some hope.. though not so fast...
girlfriend Posted in Ke$ha, Magazines
stucklabor
07-24 12:42 PM
It all depend how we interpret the law.
Here is the arguement by stuck labor
"INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed."
BUT
The above is applicable for adjustment of status only not for filing of 485.
Here the case in point is to argue for filing 485, not for adjusting of status even VISA numbers are not available. It is not mentioned anywhere in the act that the 485 petition cannot be filed. It is worth to give a try with USCIS. The present law does not mention anything about filing and we can take advantage of that.
The law is the law, there is no room for interpretation. We cannot file for Adjustment of Status using form I-485 without visa number availability. Remember that I-485 is the form name that you use to apply for Adjustment of Status. When you file I-485, you are filing for Adjustment of Status.
Please think through your ideas before posting them.
Just as a FYI and anticipating arguments that may arise, EAD is available by law to Adjustment of Status applicants and others - such as students on OPT etc - and the law specifically says who may get EAD.
I will not respond to any further arguments on this thread that are on the lines of "Let us get USCIS to reinterpret the law, let us file I-485 and not call it an Adjustment of Status application, let us lobby USCIS to get EADs without filing for Adjustment of Status etc".
In response to the posts by rpatel, valabor etc - there is ZERO potential in pursuing this directly with USCIS. IV will not and should not waste any time in this effort.
Here is the arguement by stuck labor
"INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed."
BUT
The above is applicable for adjustment of status only not for filing of 485.
Here the case in point is to argue for filing 485, not for adjusting of status even VISA numbers are not available. It is not mentioned anywhere in the act that the 485 petition cannot be filed. It is worth to give a try with USCIS. The present law does not mention anything about filing and we can take advantage of that.
The law is the law, there is no room for interpretation. We cannot file for Adjustment of Status using form I-485 without visa number availability. Remember that I-485 is the form name that you use to apply for Adjustment of Status. When you file I-485, you are filing for Adjustment of Status.
Please think through your ideas before posting them.
Just as a FYI and anticipating arguments that may arise, EAD is available by law to Adjustment of Status applicants and others - such as students on OPT etc - and the law specifically says who may get EAD.
I will not respond to any further arguments on this thread that are on the lines of "Let us get USCIS to reinterpret the law, let us file I-485 and not call it an Adjustment of Status application, let us lobby USCIS to get EADs without filing for Adjustment of Status etc".
In response to the posts by rpatel, valabor etc - there is ZERO potential in pursuing this directly with USCIS. IV will not and should not waste any time in this effort.
hairstyles 2010 kesha maxim shoot. you kesha maxim poster. kesha sebert fat. kesha fat
Jbpvisa
07-12 11:01 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
It was a pleasure and an honor to meet with you and to share my views during your panel discussion at the Harvard Worldwide Congress June 15, 2007 in Washington, D.C. I understand and appreciate that the responsibility vested in you as the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is no simple task. We applaud your service to our nation. After meeting with you personally and speaking with you, I am more convinced than ever that you will do the right thing for our country and for the people you serve, both in terms of securing our nation and in being the leader of the DHS, with over 20 federal agencies reporting to you, including the USCIS.
Purpose of this Letter
I am writing to you at this time to address recent actions by the USCIS to refuse to accept I-485 adjustment of status filing during July 2007 that are having significant impact upon the reliability of the legal immigration system in this country, as well as impacting legal foreign nationals and the many U.S. businesses that rely upon the work they perform.
USCIS Decision Contradicts its Long Standing Procedure
In contradiction of its own long standing policy and procedure, we understand that the USCIS, through its Director Gonzalez, contacted the U.S. Department of State (DOS) and requested or required the DOS to issue a �revised� Visa Bulletin on July 2, 2007. The USCIS then used the revised Bulletin to refuse to accept I-485 filings. This decision deprives thousands of foreign nationals, and their families, of the rights and privileges that are attendant to the I-485 filing.
These Highly Skilled Professionals Followed All the Rules and Believe in the American Dream
These professionals and their employers have played by our established immigration laws and rules. The vast majority of these thousands of potential applicants has a U.S. employer corporation, university or other business as a sponsor for permanent resident status. The exceptions from an employer are for those who are considered of �extraordinary ability� or whose work is in our �national interest.� Many of these applicants have completed their Bachelor�s, Master�s and/or PhD programs from U.S. universities. They believe in the opportunities of this great nation and strive to achieve the American Dream by following all the rules, working hard, paying taxes, and striving to do the right thing. They believe in this country, and rely upon our systems, our government, and our processes. Unfortunately, on July 2, 2007, we let them down. The USCIS abandoned its own system and long standing practices. This happened through manipulation of the use of visa numbers, insisting upon the issuance of a "revised visa bulletin," and instituting the USCIS policy of rejecting every employment-based I-485 that could have been filed during the month of July 2007.
USCIS Decision Denies Substantive and Procedural Rights to Highly Skilled Workers and Their Employers - Many of Whom Have Already Suffered and Will Suffer Further Harm/ Injury
Not only does the USCIS' action harm the individuals and employers involved, it undermines the reliability of our entire employment-based immigration system. The unexpected decision of the USCIS to refuse to accept any I-485 filings denies both substantive and procedural due process rights to would be applicants across the U.S. All of these applicants are employment based (EB) applicants who are primarily highly skilled professionals or experienced workers, that the U.S. seeks in high demand areas, including: science, technology, medicine, research, business, academia, and education.
The harm in not accepting the filings in July 2007 goes beyond mere delay. In reliance upon the July Visa Bulletin, starting in mid-June 2007, these applicants took the steps necessary to prepare their filings and made decisions in reliance upon the USCIS accepting their filings during July 2007. In order to be present in the U.S., as required for these filings, many applicants and their families canceled travel plans abroad or arranged to return to the U.S. on short notice missing family weddings and other important life events. They undertook medical examinations and paid for the required tests which must accompany the I-485 filings. (The USCIS had refused to waive this requirement even temporarily.) They hired lawyers to process their paperwork; they arranged to obtain documents from abroad on an expedited basis, involving foreign lawyers and foreign governments, all at a significant cost. They made employment and other strategic immigration related decisions to be able to process their I-485s for them and their families. Some canceled visa appointments at the consulates, or withdrew other immigration filings, all in reliance upon the USCIS accepting I-485 filings during July 2007.
The applicants and their employers lose the rights and privileges that accompany the filing of the I-485. These include eligibility for the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advanced Parole (AP), thus eliminating the need for the individuals and their employers to make the filings necessary to maintain a non-immigrant, temporary status. These same ancillary benefits also apply to dependant family members. Most importantly, those that have not filed I-485s are not eligible for "portability" benefits under the �American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act� of Oct. 2000 or �AC21� as it is sometimes referred to. This ineligibility for AC21 portability forces career stagnation. This is to the detriment of the individual as well as their sponsoring employer. Under AC21 portability, employers can promote and/or relocate employees to positions that are the same or similar job classifications as the positions for which they were initially sponsored. Individuals can utilize these provisions for career advancement, and for entrepreneurship. Given that the green card process often spans many years, AC21 portability allows the necessary flexibility to permit the case to continue, to accommodate changes in the sponsoring employer's needs as well as opportunities that are specific to the beneficiary.
The list of stories of individuals and families harmed by the USCIS decision is endless. We have for example, many spouses who will now be separated potentially for years on end, as one received a green card during the USCIS' June "rush," while the other is now ineligible to file.
The USCIS decision also created a burden on U.S. employers. Further delays in the green card process mean that, at best, U.S. employers have to continue to file temporary petitions to keep their workforce in the U.S. legally; at worst, it jeopardizes the availability of this needed highly educated and skilled workforce.
USCIS Motive is to Collect Millions of Additional Filing Fees
Many are baffled by the USCIS decision to reject I-485 filings in July, and its use of the �revised� Visa Bulletin as an excuse. The suspected motive is the collection of the substantially higher filing fees that will be generated after July 27, 2007. This entire incident sends the wrong message about our government, our policies and our legal system reeking of greed and inconsistency. Even the appearance of such impropriety undermines our system.
.................
continue
mheggade
07-18 04:17 PM
I could seee all the EB3 folks with PD older than 2006 and EB2 folks with PD older than 2008 will be cleared off in the next two years. I am sure there wont be not more than 1 or 2 years delay between EB2 and EB3 categories in near future.And there are lot of things going to happen for employment based immigratin in the next two years.
vdlrao,
I disagree with you. Per my calculation USCIS should have at-least 158k application with PD 2002 and 2003 (all chargeability, all cat). And yes I have arrived at this number after deducting already approved EB2 and EB3 numbers.
If you do INDIA:CHINA:MEXICO :: 40:30:30 ratio.
The break up of outstanding I485 looks like this
India :- 64k
China :- 47K
Mexico:- 47K
As per my calculation Eb3 India do not have good outlook.
vdlrao,
I disagree with you. Per my calculation USCIS should have at-least 158k application with PD 2002 and 2003 (all chargeability, all cat). And yes I have arrived at this number after deducting already approved EB2 and EB3 numbers.
If you do INDIA:CHINA:MEXICO :: 40:30:30 ratio.
The break up of outstanding I485 looks like this
India :- 64k
China :- 47K
Mexico:- 47K
As per my calculation Eb3 India do not have good outlook.
diptam
07-01 09:38 PM
Who gave that guy the right to ask questions to IV Core rudely ? He is questioning as if he hired IV core for resolving this Crisis and asking for status update.
He/She crossed the line somehow.
Pappu,
You don't need to be so polite with this member.. He/she just joined IV. Haven't done anything for IV.. Don't know what IV is doing any now start talking about IV core doing partying..
He/She crossed the line somehow.
Pappu,
You don't need to be so polite with this member.. He/she just joined IV. Haven't done anything for IV.. Don't know what IV is doing any now start talking about IV core doing partying..
No comments:
Post a Comment