gonecrazyonh4
04-25 06:29 PM
I think you have hit the nail on the head. We are on a roller coaster ride and we need to cool our heels. The two amendments to help ease retrogression are already in two of the senator�s bills. Let's push that on through. We can later on use our imaginations to solve any �bigger" immigration issues.
Easing retrogression helps some, but not may of us who are stuck at back log centeres
Easing retrogression helps some, but not may of us who are stuck at back log centeres
wallpaper gangster love poems for her.
TeddyKoochu
12-10 05:16 PM
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
Appreciate your optimism; I hope your predictions for the season end are correct. We have nothing but hope, let�s not lose it.
Appreciate your optimism; I hope your predictions for the season end are correct. We have nothing but hope, let�s not lose it.
akhilmahajan
10-25 11:15 PM
Same with me. I hope people understand that this is a serious issue.
GO I/WE GO
GO I/WE GO
2011 gangster love poems for her.
nk2006
10-21 03:30 PM
Though the denial of this MTR is against the law by USCIS, one must consider following.
AC21 is a benefit for a long delayed adjustment of status applicant to change the employer before getting GC. This law was framed based on the fact that the employee working for a long period of time with sponser (either in non-immigrant visa or in EAD) and cannot change the job because of prolonged delay in approval of 485. However, one must remember that, the fundamental priciple of granting GC is based on the fact that intent of the employee working "permanetly" or some longer period of time for the sponser. If the employer can demonstrate successfully to the USCIS that the employee does not having the intent then USCIS may deny the 485. If one resigns just immediatly after the 180 days, it doubts the legitimacy of the intent. If employer argues that the employee was waiting just for 180 days and using the law to change the job, there is a reason for USCIS to belive the employer's claim about false intent of the emploee. But one can overrule this denial in court, if the employee demonstrates that he/she worked for the sponsor for a considerable period of time before and after filing 485, to prove his/her intent.
How can USCIS can judge the legitimacy of the intent of the applicant - it can be very subjective and depend a lot on the way visa officer interprets. For example how long after six months is considered a "long wait"?
There will be always some descretionary powers to visa adjudicators but AC21 guidelines and associated memo's are detailed enough to give a clear explanation that once I485 is pending for six months, the applicants underlying I140 is valid (if its revoked or if it is not yet approved) and I485 continue to be processed - as long as the new job is same or similar. One thing that is not clear is the definitions of this same/similar job thing. We all expected some hiccups based on this interpretation. But the rejection of I485 (and subsequent MTR) based on I140 revocation is something that came out of blue and the number of these cases makes it really scary.
AC21 is a benefit for a long delayed adjustment of status applicant to change the employer before getting GC. This law was framed based on the fact that the employee working for a long period of time with sponser (either in non-immigrant visa or in EAD) and cannot change the job because of prolonged delay in approval of 485. However, one must remember that, the fundamental priciple of granting GC is based on the fact that intent of the employee working "permanetly" or some longer period of time for the sponser. If the employer can demonstrate successfully to the USCIS that the employee does not having the intent then USCIS may deny the 485. If one resigns just immediatly after the 180 days, it doubts the legitimacy of the intent. If employer argues that the employee was waiting just for 180 days and using the law to change the job, there is a reason for USCIS to belive the employer's claim about false intent of the emploee. But one can overrule this denial in court, if the employee demonstrates that he/she worked for the sponsor for a considerable period of time before and after filing 485, to prove his/her intent.
How can USCIS can judge the legitimacy of the intent of the applicant - it can be very subjective and depend a lot on the way visa officer interprets. For example how long after six months is considered a "long wait"?
There will be always some descretionary powers to visa adjudicators but AC21 guidelines and associated memo's are detailed enough to give a clear explanation that once I485 is pending for six months, the applicants underlying I140 is valid (if its revoked or if it is not yet approved) and I485 continue to be processed - as long as the new job is same or similar. One thing that is not clear is the definitions of this same/similar job thing. We all expected some hiccups based on this interpretation. But the rejection of I485 (and subsequent MTR) based on I140 revocation is something that came out of blue and the number of these cases makes it really scary.
more...
santb1975
05-25 02:31 PM
The amendments were on the senate side and the HR bills are from the house side. Please contact your state chapter lead (walking_dude for MI) for updates and find out what's happening. We have lot of work to do and we really need volunteers. I am unable to post any info. on this public forum which is open to the world.
so the amendmants which were linked to war bill are differant than all this HR bills.....?
so the amendmants which were linked to war bill are differant than all this HR bills.....?
chanduv23
05-15 10:16 PM
Maybe someone that has had to go through this can respond.
When you are working for a large(r) corporation, where all fees (including EAD/AP) are paid for by the company, who pays for the MTR?
I was under the impression that the employer pays for the filing, attorney, etc. fees, am I wrong?
Depends on ur employer. Usually after AC21 - it is obvious that there is no fee involved and many companies hire you after ac21 because they do need to deal with stuff like this.
Your employer ONLY needs to give a letter as per the AC21 rule and thats it.
When you are working for a large(r) corporation, where all fees (including EAD/AP) are paid for by the company, who pays for the MTR?
I was under the impression that the employer pays for the filing, attorney, etc. fees, am I wrong?
Depends on ur employer. Usually after AC21 - it is obvious that there is no fee involved and many companies hire you after ac21 because they do need to deal with stuff like this.
Your employer ONLY needs to give a letter as per the AC21 rule and thats it.
more...
Milind123
09-12 07:58 PM
I was at SJ rally and it was an awesome feeling to participate and hear all the honks.
Unfortunately cannot make it to the DC rally, but have been spreading the word through emails and diggs.
Milind i have contributed $100 now.
paypal transaction id: 88886835PG920640K
Thanks for your support.
Thanks for your contribution.
Unfortunately cannot make it to the DC rally, but have been spreading the word through emails and diggs.
Milind i have contributed $100 now.
paypal transaction id: 88886835PG920640K
Thanks for your support.
Thanks for your contribution.
2010 gangster love poems for her.
mirage
04-01 07:11 AM
You are exactly getting down to the problem, we need to ask the government we are paying high fees but where's the service ???
That's exactly the point..USCIS is HEADED by fools...the problem lies within...the heads dont really care if their staff is underpaid and over-worked..but the fact of it is that they just don't have the money nor manpower to get the work done. When USCIS adjudicated all those cases in 2002, it was not of their own volition but because Congress mandated it..6 years later they dont care for the immigrants..u think they'd (policy makers) care 2 hoots for the the USCIS officers...just take a look at the Infopass centers...from my experience I havent seen more than 2 officers helping customers at a time..no money..no manpower
That's exactly the point..USCIS is HEADED by fools...the problem lies within...the heads dont really care if their staff is underpaid and over-worked..but the fact of it is that they just don't have the money nor manpower to get the work done. When USCIS adjudicated all those cases in 2002, it was not of their own volition but because Congress mandated it..6 years later they dont care for the immigrants..u think they'd (policy makers) care 2 hoots for the the USCIS officers...just take a look at the Infopass centers...from my experience I havent seen more than 2 officers helping customers at a time..no money..no manpower
more...
kumhyd2
07-26 09:23 AM
FYI:
SoCal Chapter members will be having their meeting at Artesia / Poineer Blvd about 30 miles south from LA on July 28th at 3p.m. Members in this region are encouraged to attend the meeting. The meeting address is
Woodlands Restaurant
11833 Artesia Boulevard
Artesia, CA 90701
If you have questions or wish to join the yahoo group please visit
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SC_Immigration_Voice/
or send blank e-mail to
SC_Immigration_Voice-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Core Team: Can you help set up the conference call for this meeting so that those who cannot make it attend the conference call atleast.
SoCal Chapter members will be having their meeting at Artesia / Poineer Blvd about 30 miles south from LA on July 28th at 3p.m. Members in this region are encouraged to attend the meeting. The meeting address is
Woodlands Restaurant
11833 Artesia Boulevard
Artesia, CA 90701
If you have questions or wish to join the yahoo group please visit
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SC_Immigration_Voice/
or send blank e-mail to
SC_Immigration_Voice-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Core Team: Can you help set up the conference call for this meeting so that those who cannot make it attend the conference call atleast.
hair gangster love poems for her.
ak_2006
05-30 11:02 AM
Contribute generously....
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
more...
desi3933
12-21 11:47 AM
one of my close friend grew from a regular programmer to the position of VP in the span of last 6 years. he is facing lot of issues with GC.
clearly mirage didn't mean growing to the position of exactly VP. he meant a higher and slightly different position, for example an IT Manager. It is not that uncommon, for a IT Progmr who works in the same company for 5-6 years, offered a Manager position.
desi, this is argument is going nowhere, ur intentions in the beginning are good and i welcome ur critique, but leave it when recepeints aren't taking it. it became argument just for the sake of supporting ur argument.
Sure, he will face lot of difficulties, if his employer failed to file for H1 amendment when his job profile/responsibilities changed. There is a procedure in place whenever for cases when job profile changes. My job profile was changed, but my employer filed for both H1 amendment and new I-140 to reflect new job duties.
When new I-140 is filed in such cases, beneficiary retains his/her priority date.
Good Luck with your GC.
______________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
clearly mirage didn't mean growing to the position of exactly VP. he meant a higher and slightly different position, for example an IT Manager. It is not that uncommon, for a IT Progmr who works in the same company for 5-6 years, offered a Manager position.
desi, this is argument is going nowhere, ur intentions in the beginning are good and i welcome ur critique, but leave it when recepeints aren't taking it. it became argument just for the sake of supporting ur argument.
Sure, he will face lot of difficulties, if his employer failed to file for H1 amendment when his job profile/responsibilities changed. There is a procedure in place whenever for cases when job profile changes. My job profile was changed, but my employer filed for both H1 amendment and new I-140 to reflect new job duties.
When new I-140 is filed in such cases, beneficiary retains his/her priority date.
Good Luck with your GC.
______________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
hot pictures gangsta love poem.
ilikekilo
03-04 03:40 PM
Cases are being pre-adjucated, So there are RFEs and other inquiries...After this, they will wait for visa number in PD Queue....which is a good thing...This assures there will be no wastage this year....
Anycase, it looks like there will be significant forward movement...
My estimate
EB2I will enter 2005 in next 2 bulletins.
EB3I into 2003 in next 2 bulletins.
I admire ur optimism.. :)
Anycase, it looks like there will be significant forward movement...
My estimate
EB2I will enter 2005 in next 2 bulletins.
EB3I into 2003 in next 2 bulletins.
I admire ur optimism.. :)
more...
house tattoo gangsta love poems for
Keeme
03-06 05:32 PM
Few observations based on thread postings
1) Last year around this same time not many RFE/LUD were seen.
2) Most of these cases with RFE/LUD are either EB2 around 2005-2006 or EB3 2003-2004
3) My Lawyer based out of IL confirming RFEs are in high volume and majority of these are Employment verification with Birth verification and Health letter verification as close second.
Now given the gov attitude and the current scenario it does not seem that they would be interested in pre-adjudication. There is something else that is going on. On the same note I am also seeing that people with dates which could possibly be current anytime this year are not seeing any LUD/RFE. If pre-adjudicating is the objective than these cases should have received the RFEs first.
Just my observation. Any input is appreciated.
Possibility 1: Could be renewal of fingerprints as most of these 485 were filed befoe 16-17 months and FP life is 15 months. A memo was issued that they will reuse this FPs and won't ask another FPs if 485 takes longer than 15 months.
This possiblility is quetioned by so many RFEs ! Why so many RFEs if its for FP ?
2 - It could be a preparation for adjudicating thosdands of applications as some one in this tread mentioned that spill over wouldn't be as it was last year.
Also, current Economy may force them to use larger number of FB visas for EBs for next few years.
Let's see ! I don't wonder any more why 'Hope' is the most sellable slogan for politicians/cheaters around the worlds !
1) Last year around this same time not many RFE/LUD were seen.
2) Most of these cases with RFE/LUD are either EB2 around 2005-2006 or EB3 2003-2004
3) My Lawyer based out of IL confirming RFEs are in high volume and majority of these are Employment verification with Birth verification and Health letter verification as close second.
Now given the gov attitude and the current scenario it does not seem that they would be interested in pre-adjudication. There is something else that is going on. On the same note I am also seeing that people with dates which could possibly be current anytime this year are not seeing any LUD/RFE. If pre-adjudicating is the objective than these cases should have received the RFEs first.
Just my observation. Any input is appreciated.
Possibility 1: Could be renewal of fingerprints as most of these 485 were filed befoe 16-17 months and FP life is 15 months. A memo was issued that they will reuse this FPs and won't ask another FPs if 485 takes longer than 15 months.
This possiblility is quetioned by so many RFEs ! Why so many RFEs if its for FP ?
2 - It could be a preparation for adjudicating thosdands of applications as some one in this tread mentioned that spill over wouldn't be as it was last year.
Also, current Economy may force them to use larger number of FB visas for EBs for next few years.
Let's see ! I don't wonder any more why 'Hope' is the most sellable slogan for politicians/cheaters around the worlds !
tattoo gangster love poems for her.
Libra
07-06 12:35 PM
Yeah because we already sent applications before bulletin revised:D
Something is cooking and they try to cover their as.... before the legal action takes its stand....:-)), but it is too late for them..
Something is cooking and they try to cover their as.... before the legal action takes its stand....:-)), but it is too late for them..
more...
pictures Gangster Love Poems: Lovin a
techskill
09-10 02:09 PM
I think they advanced the dates to 2006 not to approve the cases but to collect new applications with the new fees.They approved couple of cases only to show that they r working on old cases (2006 which is old for them or however they interpret).
dresses gangster love poems for her.
indio0617
03-09 11:30 AM
Guys:
I think they have closed for today. Will meet again, next Wednesday, Thursday ( as per Sen Specter) to discuss more amendments....
I think they have closed for today. Will meet again, next Wednesday, Thursday ( as per Sen Specter) to discuss more amendments....
more...
makeup images Gangsta+love+poems Him
vinvin24
05-03 02:09 PM
If there is a template for fax and regular mail, we can get more people involved in this campaign. Thank you for your efforts.
girlfriend never Love Poems For Her
ychousa
07-19 12:00 PM
I checked CIS procedure in the following site: http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cissop.html
According to the procedures, until they enter data into their central sytem, it seems it's pretty tough to say that they intervene somewhere and sort out by PD. Section 6: Workload Distribution might be the key to answer our questions, but the section is missing.
So they enter the applications in the order they're received, and each application is given an "RD." The "RD" indeed plays a role in the adjudication: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
I wish I got an answer from someone in CIS.
According to the procedures, until they enter data into their central sytem, it seems it's pretty tough to say that they intervene somewhere and sort out by PD. Section 6: Workload Distribution might be the key to answer our questions, but the section is missing.
So they enter the applications in the order they're received, and each application is given an "RD." The "RD" indeed plays a role in the adjudication: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
I wish I got an answer from someone in CIS.
hairstyles Love poems are the best way to
vinod_gvk
09-09 06:59 PM
Transaction ID: 7B814063HN269762U
I_need_GC
02-28 02:01 PM
Heres the dates just as an fyi.
Filed AP: July 26,08
RD: Aug 16, 08
Took company emergency AP letter to IO by making infopass appointment. Feb 07. Got a letter Feb 12 dated feb 09 application accepted as emergency and will be expedited. Got first link update Feb 19, then Approval on Feb 20, Then another Link up date Feb 21. Attorney received 2 original copies of AP Feb 28. On the AP it has created date Feb 19.
If your AP is still pending call customer service and do open a SR. My case was handled by the Nebraska Center.
Filed AP: July 26,08
RD: Aug 16, 08
Took company emergency AP letter to IO by making infopass appointment. Feb 07. Got a letter Feb 12 dated feb 09 application accepted as emergency and will be expedited. Got first link update Feb 19, then Approval on Feb 20, Then another Link up date Feb 21. Attorney received 2 original copies of AP Feb 28. On the AP it has created date Feb 19.
If your AP is still pending call customer service and do open a SR. My case was handled by the Nebraska Center.
Keeme
03-05 11:45 AM
Our cases are with NSC. EB2. PD: Mar -06
i responded to RFE last year. then case processing resumed.
We saw LUD on all 3 cases on Friday. I called up IO at NSC and she told that
LUD was because they applied biometrics to your cases. I told her i did not get 2nd FP
notice ,we did not give any FPs. She said they have our new FPs in the system and applied
the same.
i am not sure what she is talking about???
One possible reason could be, they might have reused our FPs given during EAD renewals few months back. But does it make sense to anyone? did anyone face the same experience?
Thanks.
Could be true ! That was my first thought and counted months since filing I-485. Its more than 19 month now . The Finger prints expires in 15 months.
Considering they are running late and all these LUDs are for renewing your finger prints for next 15 months , why there are so many RFEs for people who don't have their PDs current ?
i responded to RFE last year. then case processing resumed.
We saw LUD on all 3 cases on Friday. I called up IO at NSC and she told that
LUD was because they applied biometrics to your cases. I told her i did not get 2nd FP
notice ,we did not give any FPs. She said they have our new FPs in the system and applied
the same.
i am not sure what she is talking about???
One possible reason could be, they might have reused our FPs given during EAD renewals few months back. But does it make sense to anyone? did anyone face the same experience?
Thanks.
Could be true ! That was my first thought and counted months since filing I-485. Its more than 19 month now . The Finger prints expires in 15 months.
Considering they are running late and all these LUDs are for renewing your finger prints for next 15 months , why there are so many RFEs for people who don't have their PDs current ?
No comments:
Post a Comment