ashwaghoshk
03-19 05:40 PM
Finally, labor filed on March 11.Unfortunately labor process stalled from March 1. Badluck still continues
How do you know that the labour process has slowed down from Mar 01 2011 ? Any source for this info? Please share.
How do you know that the labour process has slowed down from Mar 01 2011 ? Any source for this info? Please share.
wallpaper And if parents snicker at
drirshad
03-09 10:11 PM
Ron Gotcher says, following him for years gotta believe him now .........
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7501
Based on this information, it appears that the CIS really is adjudicating cases at a faster pace. If so, then this is unprecedented. My take on this is that the CIS is concentrating on EB3 cases, since that is where the demand seems to be. Notice that Paragraph F mentions the possibility of rapid movement in other categories. Since first preference is always "current" for everyone, that only leaves second preference for India and China.
E. RETROGRESSON OF THE WORLDWIDE, MEXICO, AND PHILIPPINES EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE CUT-OFF DATES FOR APRIL
Despite the established cut-off date having been held for the past five months in an effort to keep demand within the average monthly usage targets, the amount of demand being received from Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Offices for adjustment of status cases remains extremely high. Therefore, it has been necessary to retrogress the April cut-off dates in an attempt to hold demand within the FY-2009 annual limit. Since over 60 percent of the Worldwide and Philippines Employment Third preference CIS demand received this year has been for applicants with priority dates prior to January 1, 2004, the cut-off date has been retrogressed to 01MAR03 to help ensure that the amount of future demand is significantly reduced. As indicated in the last sentence of Item A, paragraph 1, of this bulletin, this cut-off date will be applied immediately. It should also be noted that further retrogression or “unavailability” at any time cannot be ruled out.
It has also been necessary to retrogress the Employment Third Preference Other Worker cut-off date for all countries in order to hold the issuance level within the annual limit.
F. VISA AVAILABILITY IN THE COMING MONTHS
During the past year, many preference categories have experienced steady and sometimes rapid cut-off date movement. Such action is normally followed by an increase in applicant demand. Heavy applicant demand for numbers in some categories could require cut-off date movements to slow, stop, or even retrogress at some point during the remainder of FY in order to hold visa use within the applicable annual numerical limits. Should such action occur, it would most likely be only temporary in nature, pending the start of the new fiscal year in October.
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7501
Based on this information, it appears that the CIS really is adjudicating cases at a faster pace. If so, then this is unprecedented. My take on this is that the CIS is concentrating on EB3 cases, since that is where the demand seems to be. Notice that Paragraph F mentions the possibility of rapid movement in other categories. Since first preference is always "current" for everyone, that only leaves second preference for India and China.
E. RETROGRESSON OF THE WORLDWIDE, MEXICO, AND PHILIPPINES EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE CUT-OFF DATES FOR APRIL
Despite the established cut-off date having been held for the past five months in an effort to keep demand within the average monthly usage targets, the amount of demand being received from Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Offices for adjustment of status cases remains extremely high. Therefore, it has been necessary to retrogress the April cut-off dates in an attempt to hold demand within the FY-2009 annual limit. Since over 60 percent of the Worldwide and Philippines Employment Third preference CIS demand received this year has been for applicants with priority dates prior to January 1, 2004, the cut-off date has been retrogressed to 01MAR03 to help ensure that the amount of future demand is significantly reduced. As indicated in the last sentence of Item A, paragraph 1, of this bulletin, this cut-off date will be applied immediately. It should also be noted that further retrogression or “unavailability” at any time cannot be ruled out.
It has also been necessary to retrogress the Employment Third Preference Other Worker cut-off date for all countries in order to hold the issuance level within the annual limit.
F. VISA AVAILABILITY IN THE COMING MONTHS
During the past year, many preference categories have experienced steady and sometimes rapid cut-off date movement. Such action is normally followed by an increase in applicant demand. Heavy applicant demand for numbers in some categories could require cut-off date movements to slow, stop, or even retrogress at some point during the remainder of FY in order to hold visa use within the applicable annual numerical limits. Should such action occur, it would most likely be only temporary in nature, pending the start of the new fiscal year in October.
webm
03-19 03:52 PM
May be I am not aware, say the dates move to 2005, then whoever has a PD till 2005 and has a pending 485, is bound to get GC approved,
Approval depends on luck again as you know sometimes they follow random process and by that time dates can go back or stand still or fwd..no wonders anything can happen..
Approval depends on luck again as you know sometimes they follow random process and by that time dates can go back or stand still or fwd..no wonders anything can happen..
2011 love quotes for parents.
pappu
01-16 09:44 AM
Thank you Anurakt and others that have signed up. Anurakt I am sure this time our members will take up your challange and make you pay $500
more...
chmur
09-11 03:04 PM
EB3-ROW Pending per Aug 2009 I-485 Inventory ~ 63K
The EB3-ROW Demand for October 2010 ~ 45K.
So actually backlog reduction for EB3 ROW has just been 18 K (much less than the 30K they should get). I don't see where you are seeing the overflow.
The total Pending in Aug 2009 was
EB2 ALL- 75K. EB3 all -151K . So total ~ 225K
The demand data today is EB2 = 34K(this is only I/C, no ROW demand)
Demand for EB3 = 136K.
So even though reduction in backlog is significant (225K- 170K =55K). It is not going to all categories evenly.
And unless USCIS comes up with a smarter way to determine demand data other than counting pending I-485, once this demand goes to zero they will have to advance EB2 I/C dates. Now they can be smart and advance it by 6 months to not open up floodgates and test the post 2007 demand, or just follow the rule blindly that supply > demand and the category is current. Either way, the law prevents any spillover from a category unless it is current and EB2 I/C is not getting current in 2-3 years.
I also want to believe like you that the hidden demand post 2007 for EB2I/C + EB3 ROW is as low as possible. And we won't know about the exact number till USCIS does a better job of reporting approved I-140 by country.
Check with latest Inventory data - 05/2010
Also - where can i get the demand data you are referring to ??
The EB3-ROW Demand for October 2010 ~ 45K.
So actually backlog reduction for EB3 ROW has just been 18 K (much less than the 30K they should get). I don't see where you are seeing the overflow.
The total Pending in Aug 2009 was
EB2 ALL- 75K. EB3 all -151K . So total ~ 225K
The demand data today is EB2 = 34K(this is only I/C, no ROW demand)
Demand for EB3 = 136K.
So even though reduction in backlog is significant (225K- 170K =55K). It is not going to all categories evenly.
And unless USCIS comes up with a smarter way to determine demand data other than counting pending I-485, once this demand goes to zero they will have to advance EB2 I/C dates. Now they can be smart and advance it by 6 months to not open up floodgates and test the post 2007 demand, or just follow the rule blindly that supply > demand and the category is current. Either way, the law prevents any spillover from a category unless it is current and EB2 I/C is not getting current in 2-3 years.
I also want to believe like you that the hidden demand post 2007 for EB2I/C + EB3 ROW is as low as possible. And we won't know about the exact number till USCIS does a better job of reporting approved I-140 by country.
Check with latest Inventory data - 05/2010
Also - where can i get the demand data you are referring to ??
pitha
01-30 03:20 PM
I believe it is also illegal to work before getting a social security number. When you are on H4 you dont have a social security number (you have an itin which is not good enough for working). You will not get a social security number unless you have work authorization (i797). H1 will start only after october 1, so you can apply for social security number only after October 1 (i.e if you have i 797), it will take you about 4 to 7 weeks to get ssn. You can work only after getting the ssn. Somebody correct me if i wrong here.
One more thing about desi companies.
When you go from H4 to H1 or F1 to H1, you are legally allowed to work for your sponsor only after H1 approval (I-797) comes, not after the receipt notice comes. When you transfer H1s from company A to company B, you can start working as soon as the receipt notice for transfer petition is received. That is the law.
Now, since our dear desi employers are known to be greedy and also known to be comfortable in bending, breaking or ignoring the law, once they file for your H4 to H1 transfer, they would want you to start working right away. Forget about waiting for H1 approval notice, they are unlikely to wait even for the receipt notice. It would be illegal to work on H4 even if you have the receipt notice in your hands for H4 to H1 transfer.
However, they would want you to work, so that you can start generating the revenue for the company. (hey, it costs money to do your transfer and money doesnt grow on trees). And who's gonna know. Once you are a willing participant in this, you are not going to report it, they are not going to report it and the client (your project location) would not even know the difference between H1 and H4. And ICE has its hands full in busting illegals working in meat packing plants.
Now, that is not all. In order to cover up the fact that you were working (and on their payroll) while in H4 without waiting for H1 approval, they may pay you in checks other than payroll checks. Either as an expense check or something else(cash, money order etc). There is another law they are breaking in the process of covering up the immigration law violation. The tax laws. By not paying you on a regular payroll, they cannot deduct your income tax and the employer's payroll tax. So it would be "Off the books".
Anyways, clarify with them that you will not work until you see the original approval of I-797 in your hands. That way, you wont be dragged into this mud.
-------------------------------------------
PS
I am not advocating that anyone break any laws. I am just stating what I have known from this industry and the usual practices so that people can avoid getting into situations where they unknowingly break the laws due to their employers' greed. Also, I am not denigrating Desis or desi companies, I am myself an Indian.
One more thing about desi companies.
When you go from H4 to H1 or F1 to H1, you are legally allowed to work for your sponsor only after H1 approval (I-797) comes, not after the receipt notice comes. When you transfer H1s from company A to company B, you can start working as soon as the receipt notice for transfer petition is received. That is the law.
Now, since our dear desi employers are known to be greedy and also known to be comfortable in bending, breaking or ignoring the law, once they file for your H4 to H1 transfer, they would want you to start working right away. Forget about waiting for H1 approval notice, they are unlikely to wait even for the receipt notice. It would be illegal to work on H4 even if you have the receipt notice in your hands for H4 to H1 transfer.
However, they would want you to work, so that you can start generating the revenue for the company. (hey, it costs money to do your transfer and money doesnt grow on trees). And who's gonna know. Once you are a willing participant in this, you are not going to report it, they are not going to report it and the client (your project location) would not even know the difference between H1 and H4. And ICE has its hands full in busting illegals working in meat packing plants.
Now, that is not all. In order to cover up the fact that you were working (and on their payroll) while in H4 without waiting for H1 approval, they may pay you in checks other than payroll checks. Either as an expense check or something else(cash, money order etc). There is another law they are breaking in the process of covering up the immigration law violation. The tax laws. By not paying you on a regular payroll, they cannot deduct your income tax and the employer's payroll tax. So it would be "Off the books".
Anyways, clarify with them that you will not work until you see the original approval of I-797 in your hands. That way, you wont be dragged into this mud.
-------------------------------------------
PS
I am not advocating that anyone break any laws. I am just stating what I have known from this industry and the usual practices so that people can avoid getting into situations where they unknowingly break the laws due to their employers' greed. Also, I am not denigrating Desis or desi companies, I am myself an Indian.
more...
pkak
07-09 10:50 PM
That really makes Sense, I believe USCIS/DOS are smart agencies, and wont do those kind of silly mistakes..
Whether they are smart people or not, a future department of justice investigation will find out.
http://s202395528.onlinehome.us/category/general/
However I see a way out for DOS/USCIS. They can avoid class action by claiming that they had warned the public in advance via the July 2 update to the July visa bulletin, and had modified the July visa bulletin only on July 6, after warning the public in advance. This way they can accept all applications received till July 5, and will be covered against any class action law suits.
Whether they are smart people or not, a future department of justice investigation will find out.
http://s202395528.onlinehome.us/category/general/
However I see a way out for DOS/USCIS. They can avoid class action by claiming that they had warned the public in advance via the July 2 update to the July visa bulletin, and had modified the July visa bulletin only on July 6, after warning the public in advance. This way they can accept all applications received till July 5, and will be covered against any class action law suits.
2010 Parents meet their children at
cshen
06-12 06:28 AM
We are not out of the CIR woods yet.
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
more...
mlvats
06-10 06:23 PM
Friends.
My wife is working with a company "A" in India and have filed for H1 through a company "B" in USA.
Currently she does not have any VISA.
Can her current company "A" apply for L1 and she can come to USA on L1?
And suppose she can come to US on L1 through company "A", What happens if her H1 gets approved through Company "B", Can she still continue
working for Comapny "A".?
Thanks in Advance.
-Moti
My wife is working with a company "A" in India and have filed for H1 through a company "B" in USA.
Currently she does not have any VISA.
Can her current company "A" apply for L1 and she can come to USA on L1?
And suppose she can come to US on L1 through company "A", What happens if her H1 gets approved through Company "B", Can she still continue
working for Comapny "A".?
Thanks in Advance.
-Moti
hair hot quotes on parents love.
onemorecame
10-15 01:18 PM
any one got approval after submitting recent RFE?
more...
senthil1
09-18 10:23 PM
But their argument is this will add 500k gcs in one year whether it is a recapture or not. But it will not change any overall immigration numbers as most people will stay here by using AC21. Still their policy is anti immigration so they will oppose any immigration bill.Still one or 2 congressmen/Senator can block the bill by adding hundreds of amendments. So there will not be much time to pass.What you can do for this?
Does IV already have a propaganda group of their own to thwart such baseless silly accusations?
If not, this group ought to be formed; made up of people who are patient, have very good communication skills (both verbal and written) and be well aware of the current immigration process in the US.
I am afraid that the clueless media might see these lies on Dice (which is one the top job search sites), and assume that what is posted there is accurate. If they run with it as a story without doing proper investigation, it will get unnecessary negative publicity. It needs a proper counter argument, supported by the facts. eg: the legislation that limits the current EB level at 140K per year; and the legislation that does not allow spillover of the unused visas from one year to the next.
There are a lot of ignorant people around. Some knowledge transfer to them will help us all. (There will be some people who are not receptive to knowledge. No one can help them.)
Thanks
Does IV already have a propaganda group of their own to thwart such baseless silly accusations?
If not, this group ought to be formed; made up of people who are patient, have very good communication skills (both verbal and written) and be well aware of the current immigration process in the US.
I am afraid that the clueless media might see these lies on Dice (which is one the top job search sites), and assume that what is posted there is accurate. If they run with it as a story without doing proper investigation, it will get unnecessary negative publicity. It needs a proper counter argument, supported by the facts. eg: the legislation that limits the current EB level at 140K per year; and the legislation that does not allow spillover of the unused visas from one year to the next.
There are a lot of ignorant people around. Some knowledge transfer to them will help us all. (There will be some people who are not receptive to knowledge. No one can help them.)
Thanks
hot quotes for parents.
varshadas
01-30 10:43 AM
I will send the flyer statements that I think we can put tonight. Like I said, I am not very creative, but I will put my ideas out there. Thanks Sanjay for finding out the EBC details. I like the 30 mins 500 dollars. We can pool in some money from our side and do a 30 mins program. I think it will be still worth it.
Did you guys distribute flyers at Metropark?
Thanks,
Varsha
Did you guys distribute flyers at Metropark?
Thanks,
Varsha
more...
house love quotes for parents.
andy garcia
01-26 09:40 AM
I had trouble sifting through all that data and figuring out what that was all about.
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
tattoo quotes for parents. quotes
Administrator2
06-11 01:35 PM
If you really believe that this bogus bill will become a Law, then also see the real picture, that is why I posted the other Ifs.
This Bill is titled as "Employ America Act". By having the GC, you are not an American. If you do not know the rule here it is, GC is a "Privilege", and it is not a "Right". So if this Bill passes all these people with alerady having GC will also need to pack their Bags and Go. That is the reality, dude.
So again and again do not fall over it. If you respond to this Bill, and Vote "No" against it, you are trying to send wrong messages to the originators of the bill, that we are scared. Why you guys are making everyone scared, when there is nothing to be scared about.
Look I don't want to say this to you but I am left with no other choice. When CEOs such as Steve Ballmer and John Chambers are personally calling the Senators because they think this amendment is a real threat, it will be least of our worries what opponents would think about us getting scared. We are not scared, we are simply making our voices heard. If we were scared we won't be doing this.
Now, you have no freaking clue of what is going on behind the scenes, this is your third post in this forum and all these posts in opposition to our action item which we are coordinating with other coalition partners. Why do you think you know more than the folks who are right now speaking with the Senators?
This Bill is titled as "Employ America Act". By having the GC, you are not an American. If you do not know the rule here it is, GC is a "Privilege", and it is not a "Right". So if this Bill passes all these people with alerady having GC will also need to pack their Bags and Go. That is the reality, dude.
So again and again do not fall over it. If you respond to this Bill, and Vote "No" against it, you are trying to send wrong messages to the originators of the bill, that we are scared. Why you guys are making everyone scared, when there is nothing to be scared about.
Look I don't want to say this to you but I am left with no other choice. When CEOs such as Steve Ballmer and John Chambers are personally calling the Senators because they think this amendment is a real threat, it will be least of our worries what opponents would think about us getting scared. We are not scared, we are simply making our voices heard. If we were scared we won't be doing this.
Now, you have no freaking clue of what is going on behind the scenes, this is your third post in this forum and all these posts in opposition to our action item which we are coordinating with other coalition partners. Why do you think you know more than the folks who are right now speaking with the Senators?
more...
pictures quotes about parents love. quotes for parents. quotes
guy03062
11-11 05:00 PM
Good one :p
I am surprised that this thread is still active. Usually by this time somebody from the core group puts a statement and that usually closes the discussion. I am sure this will happen soon since atleast a few posters have been requesting asistance from Pappu regarding this issue. I am just waiting for that post to come...dont know when. Hey pappu why are you taking so long......why dont you post and tell all our friends who are currently so emotional about the reality of pursuing the legal option...
I am surprised that this thread is still active. Usually by this time somebody from the core group puts a statement and that usually closes the discussion. I am sure this will happen soon since atleast a few posters have been requesting asistance from Pappu regarding this issue. I am just waiting for that post to come...dont know when. Hey pappu why are you taking so long......why dont you post and tell all our friends who are currently so emotional about the reality of pursuing the legal option...
dresses quotes for parents. quotes
BharatPremi
09-19 11:03 AM
we made them understand the difference between legal and illegal immigration.
Are you kidding or Are you seriously quoting this? Do you understand that very people you "made understood" are part of law making process? How can you say that they do not have understanding of "legal" and "illegal" immigration. Man, they are making the laws.
Are you kidding or Are you seriously quoting this? Do you understand that very people you "made understood" are part of law making process? How can you say that they do not have understanding of "legal" and "illegal" immigration. Man, they are making the laws.
more...
makeup quotes for parents. happy
tonyHK12
04-01 09:19 AM
/\/\/\
girlfriend quotes on parents. quotes
reddymjm
04-23 06:34 PM
for sharing the news
hairstyles Children Quotes For Parents
richi121175
01-16 10:21 PM
Contributed $20 in Dec and just signed up for $20 per month.
Can anyone please confirm that we are still going for I-485 provision attached to the appropriation bills in February??
Can anyone please confirm that we are still going for I-485 provision attached to the appropriation bills in February??
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
asia2america
01-19 09:40 PM
Hi! I am planning to apply EAD on my own as I could no longer afford to pay my expensive lawyer, but there I am not sure how to answer question 13 in the form which says, "Have you ever before applied for employment authorization from USCIS? Since I was and still am on H1, should I answer yes? Please help. Thanks.
