masouds
02-16 10:16 PM
If the Africans had just continued to abide by slavery, they would never have gotten their freedom, just because, "it's the American policy."
I hate to break my own promise to shut up on this, and I hate to be your history teacher: African slaves in US didn't become free because they fought with their owners. They became free since President Lincoln decided that slavery had gone on a bit too long.
When european immigrants walked into this continent and started hacking natives, they had firearm, they had the aggression and they had the numbers on their side. Which one of these do you (or we) have?
Let's stop debating this, since this issue isn't going to be resolved here; You either get the next president/congress to abolish this part of immigration law, or ask the courts to force the government to do what you like.
I hate to break my own promise to shut up on this, and I hate to be your history teacher: African slaves in US didn't become free because they fought with their owners. They became free since President Lincoln decided that slavery had gone on a bit too long.
When european immigrants walked into this continent and started hacking natives, they had firearm, they had the aggression and they had the numbers on their side. Which one of these do you (or we) have?
Let's stop debating this, since this issue isn't going to be resolved here; You either get the next president/congress to abolish this part of immigration law, or ask the courts to force the government to do what you like.
wallpaper Wallpaper quote of the Week
cps060
01-31 04:48 PM
I am actually looking for a very simple answer : My husband whose EB-2 I-140 had been approved some time back, wants to quit his job & pursue MBA on F-1. Would the I-539 be approved in this case ? Or should he plan for H4.
BTW , he has no plans to travel out of country so stamping is not an issue.
BTW , he has no plans to travel out of country so stamping is not an issue.
eilsoe
02-16 05:21 PM
ok I'm in too folks... :thumb:
Already started, gettin' some ok renders so far, just need to pump up the details and figure out how to model the subway trains... :-/
Already started, gettin' some ok renders so far, just need to pump up the details and figure out how to model the subway trains... :-/
2011 nature wallpaper quotes.
feedfront
10-13 01:57 PM
feedfront, the receipt date on my I-485 receipt notice is October 5, 2007.
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Here is the link to a post by 'mchatrvd ' to contact director..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/1599351-august-2010-approvals-tracker-58.html#post1982324
My attorney had inquired with USCIS but hasn't received any response. As I mentioned earlier neither a SR, senator/congressman inquiry has helped!
I'd also send an email to NSC but got an generic message.
How can I write to USCIS director?
thank you!
thecipher5
Here is the link to a post by 'mchatrvd ' to contact director..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/1599351-august-2010-approvals-tracker-58.html#post1982324
more...
nomi
12-13 09:54 AM
I am sure the IV core would have thought about this option of contacting USCIS and let them know the problems because of retrogression.
But I like the idea of collecting 10$ for the fax and creating awareness. Lets move.
so let find out who is dead of department of homeland Security and get addresses , phone number and fax. USCIS is branch of DHS. That`s where we need to contact them and ask them what we THEY can do for us and what are our legal options
please someone work with core team to get that fax letter ready. I can do that if core team allow me
thx.
But I like the idea of collecting 10$ for the fax and creating awareness. Lets move.
so let find out who is dead of department of homeland Security and get addresses , phone number and fax. USCIS is branch of DHS. That`s where we need to contact them and ask them what we THEY can do for us and what are our legal options
please someone work with core team to get that fax letter ready. I can do that if core team allow me
thx.
sapota
08-15 05:39 PM
Surprised by visa bulletin mentioning cutoff dates for EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW & philipines instead of U.
Does this mean EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW cases are not backlogged ? (i.e USCIS approved all it could on July1st 2007 but still visa numbers left?)
Or were these cases waiting for FBI check so could not use up visa numbers??
Either way, in a month or so (after all July VB cases are entered into database, USCIS would know its true backlog). Wish it would announce such a backlog number and make realistic predictions for when cases will be approved.
Given the recent announcement from whitehouse regarding expedited FBI checks, maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But hey, lets keep pushing, we dont want hope to be a mirage do we.
Edit/Delete Message
Does this mean EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW cases are not backlogged ? (i.e USCIS approved all it could on July1st 2007 but still visa numbers left?)
Or were these cases waiting for FBI check so could not use up visa numbers??
Either way, in a month or so (after all July VB cases are entered into database, USCIS would know its true backlog). Wish it would announce such a backlog number and make realistic predictions for when cases will be approved.
Given the recent announcement from whitehouse regarding expedited FBI checks, maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But hey, lets keep pushing, we dont want hope to be a mirage do we.
Edit/Delete Message
more...
grinch
02-27 11:17 AM
eilsoe,
I'm wondering how you made that curved bench. My bench, is just like straight, like most are, but did you manually adjust the cv's into a curve, or is their a technique?
If you could explain, it'd help alot.
And could you guys reccomend some good (free) texture websites?
I'm wondering how you made that curved bench. My bench, is just like straight, like most are, but did you manually adjust the cv's into a curve, or is their a technique?
If you could explain, it'd help alot.
And could you guys reccomend some good (free) texture websites?
2010 nature wallpaper quotes.
delhirocks
07-01 10:16 PM
I am amazed to see these new born baby members cropping up these days from nowwhere questioning IV. No wonder we are popular and feared by anti immigrants. If you guys think IV cannot do something, then go have beer and eat chips. If you think IV can do something, then tell your lobbyists to oppose our lobbyists and stop us.
Well...I guess its a good sign if thats what happening...
Well...I guess its a good sign if thats what happening...
more...
rockstart
03-12 11:56 AM
How do you guys find out what job code your H1B/labor was filed under?
My H1b saus 030, but I think the job is a 6 digit number.
Where can I locate that?
Thanks
Check your Perm Labor Section F column 2
My H1b saus 030, but I think the job is a 6 digit number.
Where can I locate that?
Thanks
Check your Perm Labor Section F column 2
hair photography quotes nature
alisa
01-23 06:33 AM
I agree, at some point, things break even, because people will frankly get fed up and leave. That point will be somewhere between 10-20 years. And we will then be congratulating the two or three Indians who wait this out.
This was just an attempt to model in the absence of reliable information, and to try and get as reliable information as can possible be got. I wish we could get more data and links here than we currently have (just one I think.)
The modelling on this thread shows wait times of 15-20 years for India, about 5 years for ROW, and somewhere in between for China (I think China will be closer to ROW than India just because their backlogs for 2001 and 2002 were one fourth that of India.)
The purpose of the exercise was to estimate wait times based on some solid data. Who is getting screwed, and by how much. (Looks like, the answer to 'who' is Indians, and the answer to 'how much' is 'A lot'.)
People will naturally not wait for 20 years to get a greencard. Either things will be fixed, or people will start leaving.
I think thigns break even at some point. It is so frustrating that it becomes no longer attractive to pursue GC (If we have not already reached that point).
You got to be open to change to survive, be it a person or a country. No point in predicting death before GC or any such extreme cases. It will definetely take as long as it needs. Its basic capitalism at best , supply and demand. You can't beat that.
Nothing wrong in trying to change the course though.
This was just an attempt to model in the absence of reliable information, and to try and get as reliable information as can possible be got. I wish we could get more data and links here than we currently have (just one I think.)
The modelling on this thread shows wait times of 15-20 years for India, about 5 years for ROW, and somewhere in between for China (I think China will be closer to ROW than India just because their backlogs for 2001 and 2002 were one fourth that of India.)
The purpose of the exercise was to estimate wait times based on some solid data. Who is getting screwed, and by how much. (Looks like, the answer to 'who' is Indians, and the answer to 'how much' is 'A lot'.)
People will naturally not wait for 20 years to get a greencard. Either things will be fixed, or people will start leaving.
I think thigns break even at some point. It is so frustrating that it becomes no longer attractive to pursue GC (If we have not already reached that point).
You got to be open to change to survive, be it a person or a country. No point in predicting death before GC or any such extreme cases. It will definetely take as long as it needs. Its basic capitalism at best , supply and demand. You can't beat that.
Nothing wrong in trying to change the course though.
more...
getgreensoon1
05-23 02:00 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 :)
MBA is not for everyone and in addition, an Online MBA doesn't have any value. MBA is not the same thing as learning cntrl C and cntrl V and then working for a shady desi consultant.
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 :)
MBA is not for everyone and in addition, an Online MBA doesn't have any value. MBA is not the same thing as learning cntrl C and cntrl V and then working for a shady desi consultant.
hot Look deep into nature - quote
rkm
09-17 10:12 PM
NICE JOKE..
It will probably cause inflation. Eventually they hope that house prices will catch up with the inflation. But a small problem though. The salary is not going to rise to match the housing price. The great benefits of global economy.:)
It will probably cause inflation. Eventually they hope that house prices will catch up with the inflation. But a small problem though. The salary is not going to rise to match the housing price. The great benefits of global economy.:)
more...
house from nature and quotes
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?
tattoo Categories: Nature
kanakabyraju
07-13 07:23 AM
YES. You will be all set.
My PD is Oct. 07 (EB 2)
Gurus.. pls advise.
Could i expect my dates to be current by mid of 2011?
Thanks,
My PD is Oct. 07 (EB 2)
Gurus.. pls advise.
Could i expect my dates to be current by mid of 2011?
Thanks,
more...
pictures nature wallpaper with quotes.
ak_2006
09-09 02:37 PM
I feel like there will be no special help from anybody including IV. I am not blaming IV for this as they have to fight for all. We (EBI) need lead the fight to do something.
But many of us not willing to do spend time/money for this cause. If a person can't do those, switch jobs, and find jobs where we can start processing in EB2, or ask current employers to apply in EB2.
But many of us not willing to do spend time/money for this cause. If a person can't do those, switch jobs, and find jobs where we can start processing in EB2, or ask current employers to apply in EB2.
dresses nature wallpaper quotes.
sukhwinderd
03-15 10:13 AM
some you of have offered accomodation. i sent private messages, but i am unable to reach these individuals. people offering accomodation please email me directly with address/phone#/details of accomodation offered directly to 2011carpool@gmail.com
time is short and i need to accomodate visiting members.
time is short and i need to accomodate visiting members.
more...
makeup Dilbert Quotes
logiclife
12-20 04:54 PM
Please lookup 245(k).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
girlfriend Nature Quotes Image
mirage
02-03 11:28 AM
The Obama administration is boasting on 'Equality amongst unequals', I am going to ask as many lawmakers I can, where is the equality for us, why immigrants are not eqal, where are our human right ? where is our Liberty ? why a Fijian who reports to me got in the country last year and got his green card and I'm waiting for 6 years now...
hairstyles nature wallpaper quotes.
svn
03-31 02:19 PM
This is very useful information. Given the data quoted, my question is: Why is the EB3 allocation for EB3 India only 2306? If the per country quota is set at 7% of 140K EB Visas and this is to be divided uniformly across all three employment categories, shouldn't EB3 India approvals have come to 9800/3 i.e roughly 3266? Actually, the same would apply for EB3 China as well!
Is this real discrimination against EB3 India/China...or am I just imagining it?Given my 8 year unending wait, I am sure I could just be hallucinating as well :-)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 6672 10124 2306
China 4999 3046 1027
S Korea 2311 4991 4001
Philippines 524 1853 5540
Mexico 2010 922 3745
All visa numbers allocated to South Korea are against EB visa numbers.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
Is this real discrimination against EB3 India/China...or am I just imagining it?Given my 8 year unending wait, I am sure I could just be hallucinating as well :-)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 6672 10124 2306
China 4999 3046 1027
S Korea 2311 4991 4001
Philippines 524 1853 5540
Mexico 2010 922 3745
All visa numbers allocated to South Korea are against EB visa numbers.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS’s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
wam4wam
02-17 07:39 AM
i agree with retrohatao
it is pretty much useless to fight for ending tetrogression when we know we are going to get stuck in name check for 2-3 years after that
infact i am hoping and praying that the EB relief bill does not pass until my name check has been cleared...as i will not be able to use the available visa numbers .
the name check issue is a big big problem.
trust me...if we dont include it right now....2 years from now...all of us will be forming a new web site with Name check as the primary issue...:eek:
it is pretty much useless to fight for ending tetrogression when we know we are going to get stuck in name check for 2-3 years after that
infact i am hoping and praying that the EB relief bill does not pass until my name check has been cleared...as i will not be able to use the available visa numbers .
the name check issue is a big big problem.
trust me...if we dont include it right now....2 years from now...all of us will be forming a new web site with Name check as the primary issue...:eek:
0 comments:
Post a Comment