hara_patta_for_rico
07-10 08:12 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
wallpaper Best Friends Forever Quote
sprash
01-30 02:35 PM
Wow! Thanks a lot for posting such detailed RFE information. This really helps a lot in understanding what I may be asked.
My GC sponsoring employer revoked my H1 last year itself. I could see the change in status back then itself within a month of having left them. Nothing happenned after that. I got a new H1 from my (then) new employer and things continued as before. This employer has not yet revoked my H1 (from what I can see) and its probably because they are almost going under. There are less than 25 people left in the company so I doubt that they will have spent the money to go and revoke all the H1s of the folks they laid off.
Maybe its like someone suggested - USCIS is pre-processing my 485 based on received date since I mailed my app very early on in July 2007.
Yes, I believe thats what they might be doing - preprocessing. There was no obvious 'trigger' event that caused RFE on my case either. They raised these RFEs even though I had not changed my sponsoring employer or transferred my h1b. I have a feeling they preprocessed mine too.
I don't mean to scare you (just prepare you for the worst) --- you might want to talk to some desi consultants and make an arrangement that in case the RFE is employment verification, they give you pay stubs from the time you were laid off. As you can see from my RFE, you might need to show your recent paystubs and employment verification. Yes, it will be a financial loss for you, but without these I believe your case can get rejected (gurus correct me if I'm wrong!).
Again I am is just hypothesizing your situation, your case might be entirely different. This is 'just in case'.....
My GC sponsoring employer revoked my H1 last year itself. I could see the change in status back then itself within a month of having left them. Nothing happenned after that. I got a new H1 from my (then) new employer and things continued as before. This employer has not yet revoked my H1 (from what I can see) and its probably because they are almost going under. There are less than 25 people left in the company so I doubt that they will have spent the money to go and revoke all the H1s of the folks they laid off.
Maybe its like someone suggested - USCIS is pre-processing my 485 based on received date since I mailed my app very early on in July 2007.
Yes, I believe thats what they might be doing - preprocessing. There was no obvious 'trigger' event that caused RFE on my case either. They raised these RFEs even though I had not changed my sponsoring employer or transferred my h1b. I have a feeling they preprocessed mine too.
I don't mean to scare you (just prepare you for the worst) --- you might want to talk to some desi consultants and make an arrangement that in case the RFE is employment verification, they give you pay stubs from the time you were laid off. As you can see from my RFE, you might need to show your recent paystubs and employment verification. Yes, it will be a financial loss for you, but without these I believe your case can get rejected (gurus correct me if I'm wrong!).
Again I am is just hypothesizing your situation, your case might be entirely different. This is 'just in case'.....
concorde
07-23 04:32 PM
Mine reached NSC on July 2 at 9:02 AM. Got Fedex delivery confirmation and no receipt from CIS yet. Will check with my lawyer for advise.
You must be joking :-) about asking the attorney for advise :-). See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=122613&postcount=39
Unfortunately most of the attorneys don't seem to be on top of the situation
and will only list out the "obvious" possible outcomes which we ourselves can list out.!! So far, at least 2 attorneys I have approaced haven't been able to tell me how 2 485 applications for a single person are handled. Godammit, it is not some rocket science question; it has to be there in some USCIS manual/rule book or a section of the immigration law.
You must be joking :-) about asking the attorney for advise :-). See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=122613&postcount=39
Unfortunately most of the attorneys don't seem to be on top of the situation
and will only list out the "obvious" possible outcomes which we ourselves can list out.!! So far, at least 2 attorneys I have approaced haven't been able to tell me how 2 485 applications for a single person are handled. Godammit, it is not some rocket science question; it has to be there in some USCIS manual/rule book or a section of the immigration law.
2011 FUNNY FRIENDSHIP QUOTES
karan007
03-07 05:09 AM
I am in the same boat. Consulted 2 attorneys, both of them provided very different overview. As per one using AC21 was very easy, didn't require much paperwork from employer (letter of employment with job responsibilities). The other one suggested that the new employer needs to support the green card process & made it sound like serious work.
Another interesting note was, the attorney who mentioned it was easy, would have charged $500 for the process vs $2500 + expenses. So kind off figured that one has to justify charge $2,500, hence the additional paperwork, etc (scare factor).
I did some research over the web. Came to the conclusion that utilizing AC21 is pretty simple. I am moving forward with it and starting my new job in April.
Since this is a big decision, I would suggest that you get a second opinion
Good Luck...
Another interesting note was, the attorney who mentioned it was easy, would have charged $500 for the process vs $2500 + expenses. So kind off figured that one has to justify charge $2,500, hence the additional paperwork, etc (scare factor).
I did some research over the web. Came to the conclusion that utilizing AC21 is pretty simple. I am moving forward with it and starting my new job in April.
Since this is a big decision, I would suggest that you get a second opinion
Good Luck...
more...
dealsnet
03-19 08:17 AM
See Ron Gotcher's Immigration news letter.
http://imminfo.com/resources/newsletter/2008-03Newsletter.pdf
http://imminfo.com/resources/newsletter/2008-03Newsletter.pdf
nojoke
09-18 11:12 AM
Economy is falling, people are losing jobs, fuel prices are rising, depressing is coming, housing market is going down. Look at the brighter side, if you invest in constructing industry building apartments you can make money now.
Jokes apart, what were the people smarter than me and you doing to prevent all this from happening?. Weren;t they smart enough then?.
Those smart people are not in charge. The people in charge were saying everything is fine and go do shopping
Jokes apart, what were the people smarter than me and you doing to prevent all this from happening?. Weren;t they smart enough then?.
Those smart people are not in charge. The people in charge were saying everything is fine and go do shopping
more...
senthil1
06-13 11:43 AM
Impact of rule 2 will be minimal and that rule will be really used not to displace
US workers if that is the purpose. If companies are not really displacing US workers why should they bother about this rule? This rule will certainly minimise the outsourcing by laying off people as H1b persons are required for offshore co-ordination.
Rule 3 is putting ad that is just like a Labor process in green card. It will delay h1b hiring for a month and really impact will be minimal
Those 2 rules are worth if companies can get best people in the world(that was the intention of H1b program. That is what Google and Microsoft are arguing)
With the restrictions we are getting 115 to 180k H1bs. If there is some plan for clearing backlog for gc then we can very well support CIR
Correct me if my understanding is wrong.
Hi, Senthil and Bugmenot
You said :They will allow some form of consulting and they may ban subcontracting in H1b.
Now you agree that consulting will be there. So the bill have to be tweeked or else even small american companies will shut down.
ex bearing point....
Rule 2 of restriction - Company cannot hire 6 months before or after it has laid of a person.
Impossible to be applied.
(Big companies will be affected with this, small companies like CDI, ABC.. who might hire a H1-B on their pay roll but they let them go when they are not able to find a new client that they can place that person).
Rule 3 - You have to advertise before you get an H1-B might be allowed but ignored like L1 is ignored now.
I will show you how the merit based system have to change for EB in my next post.
Got to go...
US workers if that is the purpose. If companies are not really displacing US workers why should they bother about this rule? This rule will certainly minimise the outsourcing by laying off people as H1b persons are required for offshore co-ordination.
Rule 3 is putting ad that is just like a Labor process in green card. It will delay h1b hiring for a month and really impact will be minimal
Those 2 rules are worth if companies can get best people in the world(that was the intention of H1b program. That is what Google and Microsoft are arguing)
With the restrictions we are getting 115 to 180k H1bs. If there is some plan for clearing backlog for gc then we can very well support CIR
Correct me if my understanding is wrong.
Hi, Senthil and Bugmenot
You said :They will allow some form of consulting and they may ban subcontracting in H1b.
Now you agree that consulting will be there. So the bill have to be tweeked or else even small american companies will shut down.
ex bearing point....
Rule 2 of restriction - Company cannot hire 6 months before or after it has laid of a person.
Impossible to be applied.
(Big companies will be affected with this, small companies like CDI, ABC.. who might hire a H1-B on their pay roll but they let them go when they are not able to find a new client that they can place that person).
Rule 3 - You have to advertise before you get an H1-B might be allowed but ignored like L1 is ignored now.
I will show you how the merit based system have to change for EB in my next post.
Got to go...
2010 quotes on best friends.
ianlock
09-12 11:34 AM
Hi,
I carnt make it to the DC Rally, as i am in the UK, but this morning i sent the Channel 4 News desk an email explaining our plight in the hope that they might cover the DC rally and get you guys some air time, i also sent the same email to the ITN news desk, so you never know you might be on TV over here.
Hope this counts as a contribution. ???
Regards
Ian lock
EB3 ROW
I carnt make it to the DC Rally, as i am in the UK, but this morning i sent the Channel 4 News desk an email explaining our plight in the hope that they might cover the DC rally and get you guys some air time, i also sent the same email to the ITN news desk, so you never know you might be on TV over here.
Hope this counts as a contribution. ???
Regards
Ian lock
EB3 ROW
more...
kbsyed61
06-06 04:47 PM
A friend of mine (from India) got his GC approval notice on 6/3. Here are the details:
LC PD - April 12 2003.
I-485 RD - June, 07, ND - July 16th 2007.
Filing Center - NSC
Received RFE 5/14/08.
Submitted reply 5/30. USCIS ack 5/31. Soft update again on 6/02.
6/03 received email about card production ordered.
Congrats to all those lucky souls.
LC PD - April 12 2003.
I-485 RD - June, 07, ND - July 16th 2007.
Filing Center - NSC
Received RFE 5/14/08.
Submitted reply 5/30. USCIS ack 5/31. Soft update again on 6/02.
6/03 received email about card production ordered.
Congrats to all those lucky souls.
hair best friendship quotes
pitha
07-13 09:03 PM
I dont know her intentions but she is helping our cause. If you want to vent your anger, there is USCIS and DOS
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
more...
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.
hot Friends Quotes Friendship
greencard_fever
03-15 06:13 PM
what i am saying is how and why is it that inspite of the PD having been current as I detailed in my original post for so long during 2000-2005 for EB 2 India, why are there applicants from way back in 2002 and 2003 still waiting?
Honestly, I thought they should have been already processed and gotten their Green cards by now.
All I am trying to figure out is how many applicants from 2004-2005 are still in the proverbial 'PIPELINE' waiting. Unless they are done, the PD is not gonna move.
If we can have it move conclusively to 2005-2006 regions relatively quickly, most problems are solved.
BTW, what are the chances that the PD may become "Current" again for EB2/EB3 India over the next 40 months?
Thanks
like Name check delays and Backlog elimation of LC was done in last 2007 which might possible that quite a bit of LC with PD 2002 - 2004 was got approved and were not able to file 485 because EB2 was "U" after August-2007
Honestly, I thought they should have been already processed and gotten their Green cards by now.
All I am trying to figure out is how many applicants from 2004-2005 are still in the proverbial 'PIPELINE' waiting. Unless they are done, the PD is not gonna move.
If we can have it move conclusively to 2005-2006 regions relatively quickly, most problems are solved.
BTW, what are the chances that the PD may become "Current" again for EB2/EB3 India over the next 40 months?
Thanks
like Name check delays and Backlog elimation of LC was done in last 2007 which might possible that quite a bit of LC with PD 2002 - 2004 was got approved and were not able to file 485 because EB2 was "U" after August-2007
more...
house Friendship Quotes Friends
StarSun
02-09 08:21 AM
I have lived in VA before and know how much of a mess it can be to commute between VA and DC.
However, for this specific event, would local members or those who have had experience attending advocacy days last year recommend to solely use public transport to get to the DC/Cap Hill area or would renting a car be of any help. I was thinking of just renting a car to just get from airport to place of stay and then use public transport on Mon/Tue to get to DC.
LOOK FORWARD TO SUGGESTIONS as I need to plan my travel.
Parking can be a problem near the Hill. It is probably best to use public transportation.
However, for this specific event, would local members or those who have had experience attending advocacy days last year recommend to solely use public transport to get to the DC/Cap Hill area or would renting a car be of any help. I was thinking of just renting a car to just get from airport to place of stay and then use public transport on Mon/Tue to get to DC.
LOOK FORWARD TO SUGGESTIONS as I need to plan my travel.
Parking can be a problem near the Hill. It is probably best to use public transportation.
tattoo you friendship quotes. i
a_yaja
01-31 02:24 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.
You can work without SSN provided you are authorized to work (H1, EAD, etc) and you have applied for SSN number. The usual practice is to pay for the first two pay cycles, and if you have not received your SSN by then, then the employer will withold wages till SSN arrives. I know this because when I came to the US as a student, I received my first paycheck without SSN. By the second paycheck (I was paid monthly), I had my SSN and so no issues. My roommate, on the other hand did not receive his SSN for nearly 3 1/2 months - the University paid his first two paychecks but did not handout his third. They told him that they would wait till he showed his SSN card to them. After he received his SSN card, they released his paycheck.
Bottom line is, you can work even without SSN card - and if you don't receive your card on time, at most the employer can withold pay until you show them your SSN card. But the employer has to pay you for any work done in legal status and they cannot refuse pay for the period during which your application was pending with SSA.
You can work without SSN provided you are authorized to work (H1, EAD, etc) and you have applied for SSN number. The usual practice is to pay for the first two pay cycles, and if you have not received your SSN by then, then the employer will withold wages till SSN arrives. I know this because when I came to the US as a student, I received my first paycheck without SSN. By the second paycheck (I was paid monthly), I had my SSN and so no issues. My roommate, on the other hand did not receive his SSN for nearly 3 1/2 months - the University paid his first two paychecks but did not handout his third. They told him that they would wait till he showed his SSN card to them. After he received his SSN card, they released his paycheck.
Bottom line is, you can work even without SSN card - and if you don't receive your card on time, at most the employer can withold pay until you show them your SSN card. But the employer has to pay you for any work done in legal status and they cannot refuse pay for the period during which your application was pending with SSA.
more...
pictures dresses friendship quotes that
god_bless_you
12-13 07:40 AM
Whats the advice on this from core group?
can we start mass web faxing USCIS for rule change?
can we start mass web faxing USCIS for rule change?
dresses wordoflife friends quotes
myvoice23
08-07 12:03 PM
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
PD: July 2004
RD: July 3rd 2007
ND: Sept 12th 2007
I-140 Approved May 2007
Service Center: NSC
Name check: Pending (when I had infopass a week ago)
Thanks guys. I wish every one good luck, and I am going to contribute my advise, and suggestions.
I opended SR 3 weeks ago, On Monday I used POJ method to talk to IO. She said, my case has been assigned to officer. Today got this status updated.
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
PD: July 2004
RD: July 3rd 2007
ND: Sept 12th 2007
I-140 Approved May 2007
Service Center: NSC
Name check: Pending (when I had infopass a week ago)
Thanks guys. I wish every one good luck, and I am going to contribute my advise, and suggestions.
I opended SR 3 weeks ago, On Monday I used POJ method to talk to IO. She said, my case has been assigned to officer. Today got this status updated.
more...
makeup Tags: Free Quotes, Friendship,
niklshah
09-10 02:37 PM
can some one pls post the link for live telecast
thanks
thanks
girlfriend images of friends quotes. love
ak27
01-19 09:21 PM
Hello Members,
I was able to attend Tri-State Con Call. These are actionable for us to increase IV membership and awareness..
1. Meet the law members compaign. List of Congress Members is below:
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=nj
2. Media Campaign: Contact major media outlets and try to publish stories about EB Green card issues.
3. Commercials in Theaters playing Hindi movies
4. Distribute flayers on NJ Transit Buses, Trains and Grocery Stores.
It is up to us to get these initiatives going as soon as we can.
I was able to attend Tri-State Con Call. These are actionable for us to increase IV membership and awareness..
1. Meet the law members compaign. List of Congress Members is below:
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi?site=ctc&state=nj
2. Media Campaign: Contact major media outlets and try to publish stories about EB Green card issues.
3. Commercials in Theaters playing Hindi movies
4. Distribute flayers on NJ Transit Buses, Trains and Grocery Stores.
It is up to us to get these initiatives going as soon as we can.
hairstyles best friends quotes funny.
thepaew
05-26 08:29 PM
I have no problems if Americans want to institute a totalitarian state. But, I do not think that random searches will pass constitutional muster.
Actually entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada and the coast.
I feel the 100 mile rule is very reasonable and Border Patrol has every right to conduct random searches, question or detain whoever they suspect is breaking the law. Since it is clear that they could do that in this area, it is absolutely no burden for me to carry my papers when traveling here. At least it is easy when I know where the enforcement will be tighter. Harassment... absolutely not! I would so encourage something similar in my own country :)
I myself was once stopped on a cold December night in 2003 in VT on I-91 by the border patrol and all 4 occupants in the car were questioned about citizenship. We showed our I-94's. We felt good that there is someone is actually doing the enforcement of immigration laws.
Actually entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada and the coast.
I feel the 100 mile rule is very reasonable and Border Patrol has every right to conduct random searches, question or detain whoever they suspect is breaking the law. Since it is clear that they could do that in this area, it is absolutely no burden for me to carry my papers when traveling here. At least it is easy when I know where the enforcement will be tighter. Harassment... absolutely not! I would so encourage something similar in my own country :)
I myself was once stopped on a cold December night in 2003 in VT on I-91 by the border patrol and all 4 occupants in the car were questioned about citizenship. We showed our I-94's. We felt good that there is someone is actually doing the enforcement of immigration laws.
kumar1
12-11 12:05 PM
Agreed! But when you call your bank to send you a debit card, they send it in days if not in weeks....that shows a sign of inter-dependability and a sense of need for each other. Sort of...I need you, you need me. You do not have to file MTR if they don't send you a debit card within 10 days.
Compare that with US consulate and DOS VISA bulletin and GC process...
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
Compare that with US consulate and DOS VISA bulletin and GC process...
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
khushig
09-05 02:07 PM
I along with many more are graduating every year and filing for there OPT. Few students are lucky, as they are able to find corporate employers (not desi's) who would sponsor H1. But for others, time is the constraint so they have to find alternatives. Hence for most OPT students the option is to look for desi employers.
I feel the problem that employers (small to midsize) are not educated about H1 B process. If this happens most of the problems will be solved. But for now with so many students graduating every semester, the only option is to go through desi employers, which in a way is not a bad idea (when you think long term).
There are many sites that provide valuable information.
www.desiopt.com is one of the many sites that helps students in this matter.
www.Sulekha.com also provides information on some good companies.
I feel the problem that employers (small to midsize) are not educated about H1 B process. If this happens most of the problems will be solved. But for now with so many students graduating every semester, the only option is to go through desi employers, which in a way is not a bad idea (when you think long term).
There are many sites that provide valuable information.
www.desiopt.com is one of the many sites that helps students in this matter.
www.Sulekha.com also provides information on some good companies.
No comments:
Post a Comment